Also known as:premeditated malices · malice aforethought
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
The culpable mental state for common-law murder encompassing an intent to kill, an intent to inflict grievous bodily harm, extreme recklessness showing a depraved heart, or an intent to commit a felony.
Sources & Authorities
How it applies
Common Examples
6
Tire Iron Attack in Parking Lot
Carla lured Omar to a dark parking lot after learning he planned to expose her theft. She retrieved a tire iron from her trunk and struck him repeatedly in the head, killing him. The deliberate use of the weapon on a vital area supplied the mental state required for murder.
Rifle Shot After Discovery
Ethan discovered Luis selling farm equipment and spent hours loading his rifle. He then confronted Luis in the barn and fired a single shot into his chest. The intentional aiming of the deadly weapon at a vital area established the required mental state for murder.
Scalpel Stabbing in Hospital
Dr. Lewis argued with nurse Carla in a hospital corridor. He retrieved a scalpel from an operating room and drove it into her chest. The purposeful use of the instrument on a vital area permitted an inference of the mental state needed for murder.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Cases
Common Law
Dictionaries
Knife Thrust to the Neck
Marco grabbed a carving knife and deliberately plunged it into Devin's neck after an argument. The targeted strike with a deadly weapon at a vital area allowed the factfinder to infer the mental state required for murder.
Extension Cord Strangulation
Professor Max locked the lab door and wrapped an extension cord around Preston's neck. He maintained pressure for several minutes despite Preston's struggles. The sustained attack on a vital area demonstrated the mental state necessary for murder.
Fatal Shooting in Territory
Dennis Davis was accused of shooting Sol Blackwell during a confrontation in Indian Territory. Evidence showed Davis aimed and fired at the victim without legal justification or excuse. The facts supported a finding that Davis acted with the mental state required for murder.
Davis v. United States160 U.S. 469, 16 S.Ct. 353, 40 L.Ed. 499 (1895)
Common questions
Frequently Asked
3
How does a factfinder infer premeditated malice from the use of a weapon?+
A factfinder may infer the required mental state when the defendant intentionally directs a deadly weapon at a vital part of the victim's body. This inference satisfies the element for common-law murder even without an express statement of intent to kill.
Supporting sources
Does premeditated malice require proof of planning or deliberation in advance?+
The mental state can be formed in the moment of the act. Deliberate use of a deadly weapon on a vital area supplies the element without separate evidence of prior planning.
Supporting sources
Can anger or provocation negate the mental state for murder?+
Mere anger or verbal provocation does not negate the mental state when the defendant intentionally uses a deadly weapon on a vital area. Only adequate provocation producing heat of passion before cooling can reduce the offense to voluntary manslaughter.
Supporting sources
530 U.S. 466 (2000)Evidence
…(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…