Also known as: malice aforethought
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
The mental state required for common-law murder. It exists when a defendant acts with intent to kill, intent to inflict grievous bodily harm, extreme recklessness showing a depraved heart, or intent to commit a felony.
Miles Montgomery worked as a deckhand on a fishing vessel. He had long quarreled with the captain. One stormy night Miles deliberately severed the captain's safety line and watched without helping as a wave swept the captain overboard to his death. The deliberate cutting of the line on a stormy night establishes intent to kill and therefore malitia praecogitata.
Michelle Murphy, a physician, grew angry at a patient's repeated demands. She deliberately administered a massive overdose of sedative that she knew would likely cause death. The patient died minutes later. The intentional choice of a lethal dose satisfies the mental state for murder.
Matthew Martinez locked his graduate student in a lab after a dispute over plagiarism. He wrapped an extension cord around the student's neck and applied force for several minutes until the student died of asphyxiation. The prolonged targeting of the throat supplies the required mental state for murder.
Madison Meyers, a store loss-prevention officer, tackled a suspected shoplifter and repeatedly stomped on the teenager's chest. The stomping caused fatal internal injuries. Directing repeated blows at a vital area permits the inference of intent to kill required for malitia praecogitata.
Melanie Morris and a coworker planned to steal diagnostic devices from a hospital storage room. To clear a hallway, Melanie injected an elderly patient with a large unauthorized dose of sedative that caused respiratory arrest and death. The injection during the felony supplies the mental state for murder.
Meredith Maxwell was charged with killing another person. Evidence showed the killing occurred while she suffered from unsoundness of mind. The prosecution still had to prove the mental state of malitia praecogitata beyond a reasonable doubt despite the mental-condition evidence.
Dennis Davis was indicted for the crime of having, on the 18th day of September, 1894, at the Creek Nation, in the Indian Territory, within the Western District of Arkansas, feloniously, wilfully, and of his malice aforethought, killed and murdered one Sol Blackwell. He was found guilty of the charge in the indictment. A motion for a new trial having been overruled, and the court having adjudged that the accused was guilty of the crime of murder, as charged, he was sentenced to suffer the penalty of death by hanging. At the trial below the government introduced evidence which, if alone considered, made it the duty of the jury to return a verdict of guilty of the crime charged. But there was evidence tending to show that at the time of the killing the accused, by reason of unsoundness or weakness of mind, was not criminally responsible for his acts. In addition to the evidence of a practicing physician of many years standing, and who, for the time, was physician at the jail in which the accused was confined previous to his trial, other witnesses testified that they had been intimately acquainted with the defendant for several years, lived near him, and had been frequently with him, knew his mental condition, and that he was weak-minded, and regarded by his neighbors and people as being what they called half crazy. Other witnesses who had known the defendant for ten to twenty years, witnesses who had worked with him and had been thrown in constant contact with him, said he had always been called half crazy, weak-minded; and in the opinion of the witnesses defendant was not of sound mind.
Malitia praecogitata exists when the defendant acts with intent to kill, intent to inflict grievous bodily harm, extreme recklessness showing a depraved heart, or intent to commit a felony. Each of these four categories independently supplies the required mental state for murder.
Supporting sources
…(1975), in which we invalidated a Maine statute that presumed that a defendant who acted with an intent to kill possessed the "malice aforethought" necessary to constitute the State's murder offense (and therefore, was subject to that crime's associated punishment of life imprisonment). The statute placed the burden on the defendant…
…that case, a Maine jury had been instructed that if the State established that the homicide was both intentional and unlawful, malice aforethought was to be implied unless the defendant proved by a preponderance of the evidence that he acted in the heat of passion on sudden provocation. We held that such instructions were…
…the current sections. The Georgia Code contains only one degree of murder. A person commits murder "when he unlawfully and with malice aforethought, either express or implied, causes the death of another human being." Ga. Code Ann. § 16-5-1(a) (1984). A person convicted of murder "shall be punished by death or by imprisonment for…
…1894, at the Creek Nation, in the Indian Territory, within the Western District of Arkansas, feloniously, wilfully, and of his malice aforethought, killed and murdered one Sol Blackwell. He was found guilty of the charge in the indictment. A motion for a new trial having been overruled, and the court having adjudged that the accused…
…LEVENTHAL, Circuit Judge Appellant Bernard Austin was indicted for murdering Nettie Scott with premeditation, deliberation, and malice aforethought. There was no felony-murder count. Appellant was convicted of first-degree murder. The prosecutor did not request the death penalty. The jury recommended life imprisonment and appellant was…
Yes. When a defendant intentionally uses a deadly weapon against a vital part of the victim's body, the factfinder may infer intent to kill and thereby satisfy the requirement of malitia praecogitata.
Supporting sources
Murder requires an unlawful killing committed with malitia praecogitata. Voluntary manslaughter is an intentional killing that would otherwise be murder but occurs in the heat of passion after adequate provocation and before a reasonable cooling-off period. The presence of malitia praecogitata keeps the offense at murder unless the provocation elements are met.
Supporting sources
Yes. When a defendant intends to commit a felony and a death results during its commission, the intent to commit the felony supplies implied malice and satisfies the requirement of malitia praecogitata for murder.
Supporting sources
Yes. When malitia praecogitata is an element of murder, the prosecution must prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. A state may not shift to the defendant the burden of disproving it by requiring proof of heat of passion.
Supporting sources