State v. Porter
142 Idaho 371, 2005 Ida. LEXIS 176, 128 P.3d 908 (2005)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A specific intent to kill is not a required element for second-degree murder or voluntary manslaughter in Idaho. The element of malice aforethought for second-degree murder can be satisfied by proof of implied malice, which involves an intentional act whose natural consequences are dangerous to human life, performed with conscious disregard for that danger.
Facts:
- Michael S. Porter and D.J. Flett met while drinking at a bar.
- At approximately 2:00 a.m., a conflict arose between Porter and Flett outside the bar.
- Porter punched Flett, causing Flett to fall to the ground.
- While Flett was lying on the ground, Porter struck him two or three more times in the face.
- Flett's head hit the pavement after he was knocked unconscious, causing severe brain damage.
- Flett subsequently died from the injuries he sustained.
Procedural Posture:
- The State charged Michael S. Porter with second-degree murder.
- At a preliminary hearing, the magistrate judge found probable cause for the charge based on malice aforethought, despite the State conceding a lack of evidence for intent to kill, and bound Porter over for trial.
- In district court, Porter filed a motion to dismiss or reduce the charge.
- The district court judge reduced the charge to voluntary manslaughter, ruling that intent to kill was a necessary element for second-degree murder.
- Both the State and Porter appealed the district court's ruling to the Idaho Court of Appeals.
- The Idaho Court of Appeals, as the intermediate appellate court, reversed the district court, holding that neither second-degree murder nor voluntary manslaughter requires an intent to kill, and ordered the second-degree murder charge to be reinstated.
- Porter (now the petitioner) petitioned the Idaho Supreme Court (the state's highest court) for review of the Court of Appeals' decision.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a charge of second-degree murder in Idaho require the state to prove that the defendant possessed a specific intent to kill the victim?
Opinions:
Majority - Schroeder, Chief Justice
No. A charge of second-degree murder in Idaho does not require the state to prove a specific intent to kill. The statutory definition of murder requires malice aforethought, which can be either express or implied. While express malice is the deliberate intention to kill, implied malice exists when the circumstances of the killing show an 'abandoned and malignant heart.' The court clarifies that previous case law suggesting intent to kill was required was either misinterpreted or based on overruled precedent. Citing State v. Dunlap, the court reaffirms that a killing committed with an 'abandoned and malignant heart' constitutes murder even without a premeditated intent to kill. This implied malice is established when a killing results from an intentional act, the natural consequences of which are dangerous to human life, and the act was deliberately performed with knowledge of the danger and with conscious disregard for human life. The court also disavowed prior case law that had incorrectly stated intent to kill was a necessary element of voluntary manslaughter.
Analysis:
This decision provides a crucial clarification of Idaho's homicide law, solidifying that a defendant can be convicted of second-degree murder based on a mental state of extreme recklessness, rather than a specific intent to kill. By endorsing the 'implied malice' or 'abandoned and malignant heart' theory, the court lowers the mens rea burden for prosecutors in cases where a defendant's actions are foreseeably fatal but their subjective intent is difficult to prove. This ruling aligns Idaho's judicial interpretation with the plain language of its statutes and corrects a line of appellate cases that had created confusion regarding the elements of both second-degree murder and voluntary manslaughter.
Unlock the full brief for State v. Porter