dissenting.
I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion in the reversal of appellant's conviction of Attempted Murder. Without any question, attempted murder, like all crimes, must be proven including the intent to commit the crime.
The majority opinion correctly sets forth the instruction given by the trial judge on this subject. I cannot agree with the majority's conclusion that this instruction does not tell the jury they must find that appellant intended to kill the victim. The trial court's instruction stated that in order to convict the defendant of attempted murder, the jury must find that the defendant knowingly threatened to kill the victim, beat her about the face, head and torso with his fists and a certain blunt object, and that this conduct was a substantial step toward the commission of the crime of murder.
To say that this language does not convey to the jury that they must find that appellant intended to kill the victim is unrealistic to the extreme. It defies logic to believe that any person could listen to this instruction and then state that there was no need to find that appellant intended to kill the victim.
I would remand this cause to the trial court for resentencing on the habitual offender finding and would affirm the trial court in all other respects.