State v. Barnes (1989)
In State v. Barnes, 162 Ariz. 92, 781 P.2d 69 (App. 1989), the defendant shot the victim at close range with a rifle, yet he survived. 162 Ariz. at 93, 781 P.2d at 70.
Barnes was convicted of attempted manslaughter pursuant to 13-1103(A)(2). Id.
He argued "there is no such crime as attempted heat of passion or sudden quarrel manslaughter," relying on State v. Adams, 155 Ariz. 117, 120-21, 745 P.2d 175, 179-80 (App. 1987), in which we held the offenses of attempted reckless manslaughter and attempted negligent homicide are not cognizable offenses in Arizona because one could not attempt to commit a crime that only required reckless conduct or criminal negligence and not a specific intent. Barnes, 162 Ariz. at 93, 781 P.2d at 70.
In the alternative, Barnes argued attempted heat of passion or sudden quarrel manslaughter required the jury to be instructed that it must find proof of specific intent to kill, rather than only the intent to shoot the victim. Id.
In rejecting both arguments, the court distinguished Adams on the basis that, "what must be 'intentional' is the conduct." Id.
The court tersely concluded that evidence of intentional shooting, knowing "the shooting would cause death or serious physical injury," was sufficient. Id.