State v. Williams, 427 S.C. 148

Background

Gerald Williams (Petitioner) was convicted of three counts of attempted murder for shooting into an occupied mobile home; the intended victim was a rival drug dealer (Young), but two other occupants (Ycedra Williams and Joseph Wrighton) were present and targeted as well.
Police received a BOLO for a minivan linked to the retaliators; officers later stopped the van, arrested Petitioner, and recovered purple latex glove fragments that matched Petitioner’s DNA and firearms found near the scene.
The State’s theory at trial included transferred intent; the trial court instructed the jury that attempted murder was a general-intent crime and that transferred intent could apply. Petitioner did not object to the court’s statement that attempted murder was a general-intent crime.
Petitioner sought a lesser-included instruction for assault and battery in the first degree (AB-1st); the trial court refused and the jury convicted on three attempted murder counts.
On appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed; this Court granted certiorari to consider (1) whether failure to charge AB-1st was error and (2) whether transferred intent applies to attempted murder (a specific-intent crime under later precedent).

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Williams)	Held
Whether the trial court erred by refusing AB-1st lesser-included instruction	No error; evidence supports only attempted murder, not lesser offense	Trial court should have charged AB-1st because no victims were injured	No error; viewing evidence favorably to Williams, evidence did not permit conviction of lesser offense rather than greater one
Whether transferred intent may supply mens rea for attempted murder	Transferred intent applies because jury was instructed attempted murder is general-intent; doctrine fits here	Transferred intent should not apply to attempted murder, a specific-intent crime (must intend to kill that specific person)	Court declined to decide applicability of transferred intent to specific-intent attempted murder because case was tried (without objection) as general-intent; transferred intent instruction was permissible here; portion of Court of Appeals opinion on transferred intent vacated
Whether convictions can be sustained without invoking transferred intent	N/A (alternative State position)	Convictions require proof of intent to kill specific victims	Sustained convictions for attempted murders of Young and Wrighton without relying on transferred intent because Petitioner intended to shoot the person who appeared in the doorway; conviction for Williams (third victim) not reversed because sentences concurrent and case tried as general-intent
Effect of trial court instructing attempted murder as general-intent despite later precedent (King)	Instruction became law of the case since not appealed at trial	Instruction was incorrect and undermines convictions	Instruction was unchallenged at trial and thus is law of the case; Court will not grant relief on that basis now

Key Cases Cited

State v. King, 422 S.C. 47, 810 S.E.2d 18 (S.C. 2017) (held attempted murder requires specific intent to kill)
State v. Fennell, 340 S.C. 266, 531 S.E.2d 512 (S.C. 2000) (recognizes transferred intent applies to general-intent crimes)
State v. Heyward, 197 S.C. 371, 15 S.E.2d 669 (S.C. 1941) (early precedent applying transferred intent to general-intent offenses)
State v. Mattison, 388 S.C. 469, 697 S.E.2d 578 (S.C. 2010) (court reviews jury charges as a whole in light of evidence)
Suber v. State, 371 S.C. 554, 640 S.E.2d 884 (S.C. 2007) (trial court must charge lesser-included offense if any evidence supports it)
State v. Byrd, 323 S.C. 319, 474 S.E.2d 430 (S.C. 1996) (view evidence in light most favorable to defendant when assessing need for lesser-included charge)
State v. Drayton, 293 S.C. 417, 361 S.E.2d 329 (S.C. 1987) (no lesser-included instruction required when State’s version yields only greater offense and defendant’s version yields acquittal)