Baldwin v. Com.

645 S.E. 2d 433 · 2007

Facts

Officer Mark D. Bowen observed Demetrius D. Baldwin speeding in a residential area and followed him. After Baldwin stopped his car in a turn lane, Bowen parked behind him and approached the vehicle on foot. As Bowen tapped on the window, Baldwin put both hands on the steering wheel, turned his vehicle towards Bowen, and sped off. Bowen had to push off the back of the car to avoid being run over by the rear wheels. Baldwin was pursued by police and arrested approximately seven miles away. Baldwin testified he panicked due to an outstanding warrant for a DUI probation violation and denied intending to strike Bowen.

Procedural history

The Circuit Court of Chesterfield County convicted Baldwin of attempted murder and eluding police after a bench trial, sentencing him to 15 years with 11 suspended for attempted murder. Baldwin appealed his attempted murder conviction to the Court of Appeals of Virginia, which affirmed the conviction, finding sufficient evidence of intent to kill, and remanded for resentencing. This Court awarded Baldwin an appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeals.

Issue

The sole issue in this appeal is whether the evidence was sufficient to prove the necessary intent to kill to support a conviction for attempted murder.

Holding

The Court reversed the judgment of the Court of Appeals, finding the evidence insufficient to prove the necessary intent to kill. Baldwin's conviction for attempted murder was reversed and the indictment dismissed.

Rule

To sustain a conviction for attempted murder, the Commonwealth must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant possessed a specific intent to kill. While general intent may suffice for murder, attempted murder requires a specific intent to commit the crime. When reviewing sufficiency of evidence, a judgment will be affirmed unless it is without evidence to support it or is plainly wrong. Circumstantial evidence must exclude any reasonable hypothesis of innocence to prove specific intent. The court reasoned that evidence showing a defendant turned their vehicle into traffic to flee, rather than directly aiming at an officer standing beside or behind the vehicle, does not establish specific intent to kill.

Read the full opinion on CourtListener

Case brief last reviewed 2026-09-28. Prepared by CaseReader from the published opinion.