I get the point you bring up about each state having varying laws in there penal code, but there is always something of equivalency. Your example of CA fits the same bill with "assault with a deadly weapon" which is what this incident would have been if it took place in CA.JALLEN wrote:Not necessarily. Each state has its own peculiar definition in its penal statutes.bauer wrote:Aggravated Assault is aggravated assault no matter what state it happened in.apostate wrote:It didn't happen in Texas.
California apparently does not have a crime of "aggravated assault." Penal Code 240-248 describe all manner of acts, from assault, to battery to aggravated battery to assault with a deadly weapon, with a plethora of different penalties depending on the status of the victim, consistent with the convoluted and hodge-podge approach so popular with the legislature here for decades.
In law school, we learned that a battery is an unlawful touching, while an assault was placing someone in apprehension of an unlawful touching. "Unlawful" for that purpose generally meant unconsented to.
It looks as though NC has Felonious Assault with a Deadly weapon with intent to kill or inflicting serious injury (N.C. §14-32) which it self could be punished with varying felony "classes" ... the discharging of weapon into an occupied building was one of the charges he drew and it is also punishable with a felony. Either way law enforcement probably could have leveled more charges on the guy and didn't.