Sean O'Connell and his friends were walking to his car after a party. They were approached by a different group.
D demanded a beer, and O'Connell's friend refused. D swung a wine bottle at O'Connell's friend, who ducked. The bottle hit O'Connell instead.
O'Connell was badly injured (lost teeth, no feeling in lip).
D was charged with aggravated battery based on permanent disability and great bodily harm.
D contended that he did not intend to cause permanent disability.
Procedural History:
Trial court found D guilty of aggravated battery.
IL Appellate Court affirmed, D guilty of aggravated battery.
Issues:
How can a prosecutor prove intent to bring about a certain result?
Holding/Rule:
To prove intent to bring about a certain result, a prosecutor must prove that the D had a conscious objective to achieve the harm defined, or that the D was consciously aware that the harm defined was practically certain to be caused by his conduct.
Actions of Ds strongly show their intent/mental state.
Reasoning:
Permanent disability was caused since all that must be proved is that some body part does not and will not work as normal because of the act.
The state must establish specific intent; problems of proof alleviated by the ordinary presumption that one intends the natural and probable consequences of his actions.
Intent can be inferred from the surrounding circumstances, the D's words, the weapon used, and the force of the blow.
The jury could reasonably infer through common sense that D had the intent to cause permanent disability.
