People v. Gibson, 210 P.2d 747 (Cal. App. 1949)

  • Facts: ∆ was apprehended in circumstances strongly suggesting an intent to commit a crime (typical fact pattern: caught with tools/weapons/preparation but before completion).
  • Issue: Whether attempt mens rea (specific intent) can be established by circumstantial evidence.
  • Rule: The mens rea for attempt may be inferred from the totality of the circumstances—direct proof of intent is not required.
  • Analysis: Intent is rarely confessed; courts must rely on the surrounding acts (preparation, tools, statements, prior conduct) to infer purpose.
  • Judgment: Conviction affirmed.

Reading: pp. 262–67. Takeaway: attempt mens rea may be inferred from the circumstances. See Ch. 6—Attempt.