Perez v. State

Morton, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. Appellant was convicted of assault with intent to murder by Judge George D. Solter sitting without a jury in the Criminal Court of Baltimore and sentenced to a term of five years under the jurisdiction of the Department of Correction. The victim, John Papa, was the owner of a house occupied by himself, a Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Kelly who resided on the second floor and the appellant who rented two rooms on the first floor where the victim also resided. At approximately 11:30 p.m. on the evening of December 4, according to the victim, he went down to the basement of the building where his kitchen and bath were located.

After a short stay in the basement, he started up the steps to the first floor when “Perez was hiding in ⁴⁵⁴ back of the steps. He came out. * * * I seen him when he come out. * * * And I start to holler before I know he is going to hurt me. I start to holler before they [he] grab me. So, he dragged me down to the concrete and he stabbed me in the neck. * * * And he pulled my shirt off from my pants and he stabbed me in the back.

And I start hollering and hollered and hollered. And he presses his hand awful hard on my mouth and he said, ‘Shut up you, damn you.’ ” Sometime prior to the assault, Papa had sent an eviction notice to the appellant and immediately prior to the assault they had argued concerning the setting of a thermostat which was located in the appellant’s apartment. Joseph Kelly testified that he heard two screams at approximately 11:30 p.m. on December 4,1967. He then ran down to the first floor and saw the appellant coming up the stairs from the basement.

The appellant explained that Papa had fallen down the stairs. Kelly noticed that the victim was wedged between the wall and ladder alongside the steps and approximately three steps from the basement floor and was bleeding around the throat. A portion of the victim’s medical record admitted into evidence indicated that the victim had suffered multiple stab wounds in his neck and chest. The appellant testified in his own behalf and denied that he had stabbed the victim, stating that he was in the home of a friend at the time of the assault.

He admitted that he was carrying a “Scout” knife containing a two-inch blade at the time of the crime and that he had previously been convicted of assault. Appellant first contends that the evidence is legally insufficient to sustain his conviction since “the State failed to prove that the appellant had an intention to commit grievous bodily harm to Mr. Papa.” It is well settled that specific intent to kill is not a necessary element to sustain a conviction of assault with intent to murder. The conviction will be sustained if the evidence shows that the accused intended to commit grievous bodily harm up ⁴⁵⁵ on the victim. Tate v. State, 236 Md. 312 ; Lawrence v. State, 2 Md. App. 736 ; McFadden v. State, 2 Md. App. 725 .

Intent, of course, is a subjective matter and may be proved by establishing facts which permit a reasonable inference that the accused intended the consequences of his acts. Davis v. State, 204 Md. 44 . Here the evidence was clear that Papa sustained stab wounds about the neck and chest which are vital parts of the body and we cannot say that the trial court was clearly erroneous in giving credence to the victim’s testimony that they were inflicted by the appellant. Md. Rule 1086.

The lower court was not required to believe the appellant’s alibi testimony,