Legal Definitions - repugnant verdict

A repugnant verdict occurs when a jury's findings on different charges, or on different elements of a single charge, are logically inconsistent or contradictory. This means that the jury's conclusions cannot both be true simultaneously, indicating a fundamental flaw in their reasoning or understanding of the law and evidence.

Here are some examples to illustrate this concept:

• Example 1: Contradictory Findings on Related Criminal Charges

  Imagine a defendant is charged with two crimes: aggravated assault (which requires the intent to cause serious bodily harm) and simple assault (which requires only the intent to cause bodily harm). The jury returns a verdict finding the defendant guilty of aggravated assault but simultaneously not guilty of simple assault.

  This verdict is repugnant because aggravated assault inherently includes all the elements of simple assault, plus the additional element of serious bodily harm. If the jury found the defendant guilty of the more serious crime, they must have also found that the defendant committed simple assault. Finding the defendant not guilty of the lesser offense while guilty of the greater offense is a logical contradiction that cannot stand.

• Example 2: Inconsistent Findings on Elements of a Single Crime

  Consider a case where a defendant is charged with burglary, which typically requires both unlawfully entering a building and having the intent to commit a crime inside at the time of entry. During deliberations, the jury is asked to answer specific questions (known as special interrogatories) in addition to their general verdict. The jury returns a general verdict of guilty of burglary, but in response to a special interrogatory, they state that they found no intent to commit a crime inside the building at the time of entry.

  This verdict is repugnant because the intent to commit a crime inside is an essential element of burglary. If the jury explicitly found that this crucial element was missing, they could not logically or legally find the defendant guilty of burglary. The finding on the element directly contradicts the ultimate guilty verdict.