§ 303. Causal relationship between conduct and result.
(a) General rule.--Conduct is the cause of a result when:
(1) it is an antecedent but for which the result in question would not have occurred;
and
(2) the relationship between the conduct and result satisfies any additional causal requirements
imposed by this title or by the law defining the offense.
(b) Divergence between result designed or contemplated and actual result.--When intentionally or knowingly causing a particular result is an element of an offense,
the element is not established if the actual result is not within the intent or the
contemplation of the actor unless:
(1) the actual result differs from that designed or contemplated as the case may be, only
in the respect that a different person or different property is injured or affected
or that the injury or harm designed or contemplated would have been more serious or
more extensive than that caused; or
(2) the actual result involves the same kind of injury or harm as that designed or contemplated
and is not too remote or accidental in its occurrence to have a bearing on the actor's
liability or on the gravity of his offense.
(c) Divergence between probable and actual result.--When recklessly or negligently causing a particular result is an element of an offense,
the element is not established if the actual result is not within the risk of which
the actor is aware or, in the case of negligence, of which he should be aware unless:
(1) the actual result differs from the probable result only in the respect that a different
person or different property is injured or affected or that the probable injury or
harm would have been more serious or more extensive than that caused; or
(2) the actual result involves the same kind of injury or harm as the probable result
and is not too remote or accidental in its occurrence to have a bearing on the liability
of the actor or on the gravity of his offense.
(d) Absolute liability.--When causing a particular result is a material element of an offense for which absolute
liability is imposed by law, the element is not established unless the actual result
is a probable consequence of the conduct of the actor.
Cross References. Section 303 is referred to in section 2607 of this title.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
55
cases (
12 in the last 5 years), 1978–2026 · leading case:
Commonwealth v. Jones, 912 A.2d 268 (Pa. 2006).
Commonwealth v. Jones, 912 A.2d 268 (Pa. 2006).
· cites it 6× “Jones asserts that the trial court failed to instruct the jury on transferred intent, see 18 Pa.C.S. § 303(b), and thus ran afoul of the requirement of Winship .”
Commonwealth v. Palmer, 192 A.3d 85 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2018).
· cites it 2× “The doctrine is codified at 18 Pa.C.S. § 303 : § 303. Causal relationship between conduct and result .”
Commonwealth v. Spotti, 94 A.3d 367 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2014).
· cites it 5× “Our af-firmance recognizes that but for Appellant’s drunken and erratic driving, Mr.”
Commonwealth v. DeJesus, 787 A.2d 394 (Pa. 2001).
· cites it 2× “18 Pa.C.S. § 303(b)(1); Commonwealth v. Gaynor, 538 Pa.”
Commonwealth v. Ludwig, 874 A.2d 623 (Pa. 2005).
· cites it 2× “See 18 Pa.C.S. § 303. [3] Indeed, I note that if the elements of the offense of third-degree murder were automatically bootstrapped into any separate offense classified as a type of third-degree murder, there would be no need to separately create such an offense because the…”
Commonwealth v. Pestinikas, 617 A.2d 1339 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1992).
· cites it 4× “" (emphasis supplied)); Section 303 of the Crimes Code, 18 Pa.C.S. § 303(d) (" Absolute liability When causing a particular result is a material element of an offense for which absolute liability is imposed by law, the element is not established, unless the actual result is a…”
Commonwealth v. Buterbaugh, 91 A.3d 1247 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2014).
“2008) (citations and quotation marks omitted); see also 18 Pa. Cons.Stat.Ann. § 303(a). The first step in the analysis involves a heightened “but for” test which requires Appellant’s act to be a direct and substantial factor resulting in the death of Henry.”
Commonwealth v. Moore, 395 A.2d 1328 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1978).
· cites it 3× “18 Pa.C.S. § 303(b) and (c). Appellant next contends that the evidence was insufficient to sustain a guilty verdict for aggravated assault because there was no evidence that he caused or attempted to cause serious bodily injury.”
Commonwealth v. Jones, 610 A.2d 931 (Pa. 1992).
· cites it 2× “2d 460, 461-62 (1965) (transferred intent); 18 Pa.C.S. § 303(b)(1). Next, appellant claims that the prosecutor, during his opening statement to the jury, made remarks that were not properly based on evidence that he planned to introduce.”
Commonwealth v. Koch, 443 A.2d 1157 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1982).
· cites it 4× “Section 3732 also requires the Commonwealth to prove that appellee's alleged violation of section 3703 caused the victim's death.”
Commonwealth v. Jordan, 212 A.3d 91 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2019).
“7 Jordan does not separately address the conviction for crimes against Hughes from the convictions for crimes against Green. However, once the crime of Conspiracy is established, he was liable for crimes committed by King under the conspiratorial liability scheme.”
Commonwealth v. Padilla, 80 A.3d 1238 (Pa. 2013).
“2d 268, 279 (2006) (citing the doctrine of transferred intent, 18 Pa.C.S. § 303(b)(1), pursuant to which “the intent to murder may be transferred where the person actually killed is not the intended victim”).”
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 303(a) — 14 cases
Commonwealth v. Buterbaugh, 91 A.3d 1247 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2014).
“2008) (citations and quotation marks omitted); see also 18 Pa. Cons.Stat.Ann. § 303(a). The first step in the analysis involves a heightened “but for” test which requires Appellant’s act to be a direct and substantial factor resulting in the death of Henry.”
Commonwealth v. Spotti, 94 A.3d 367 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2014).
“Our af-firmance recognizes that but for Appellant’s drunken and erratic driving, Mr.”
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 303(a)(1) — 3 cases
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 303(b) — 15 cases
Commonwealth v. Jones, 912 A.2d 268 (Pa. 2006).
“Jones asserts that the trial court failed to instruct the jury on transferred intent, see 18 Pa.C.S. § 303(b), and thus ran afoul of the requirement of Winship .”
Commonwealth v. Palmer, 192 A.3d 85 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2018).
“The doctrine is codified at 18 Pa.C.S. § 303 : § 303. Causal relationship between conduct and result .”
Commonwealth v. Moore, 395 A.2d 1328 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1978).
“18 Pa.C.S. § 303(b) and (c). Appellant next contends that the evidence was insufficient to sustain a guilty verdict for aggravated assault because there was no evidence that he caused or attempted to cause serious bodily injury.”
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 303(b)(1) — 16 cases
Commonwealth v. Jones, 912 A.2d 268 (Pa. 2006).
“Jones asserts that the trial court failed to instruct the jury on transferred intent, see 18 Pa.C.S. § 303(b), and thus ran afoul of the requirement of Winship .”
Commonwealth v. Jones, 610 A.2d 931 (Pa. 1992).
“2d 460, 461-62 (1965) (transferred intent); 18 Pa.C.S. § 303(b)(1). Next, appellant claims that the prosecutor, during his opening statement to the jury, made remarks that were not properly based on evidence that he planned to introduce.”
Commonwealth v. Padilla, 80 A.3d 1238 (Pa. 2013).
“2d 268, 279 (2006) (citing the doctrine of transferred intent, 18 Pa.C.S. § 303(b)(1), pursuant to which “the intent to murder may be transferred where the person actually killed is not the intended victim”).”
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 303(b)(2) — 1 case
Commonwealth v. Moore, 395 A.2d 1328 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1978).
“18 Pa.C.S. § 303(b) and (c). Appellant next contends that the evidence was insufficient to sustain a guilty verdict for aggravated assault because there was no evidence that he caused or attempted to cause serious bodily injury.”
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 303(c)(2) — 1 case
Commonwealth v. Moore, 395 A.2d 1328 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1978).
“18 Pa.C.S. § 303(b) and (c). Appellant next contends that the evidence was insufficient to sustain a guilty verdict for aggravated assault because there was no evidence that he caused or attempted to cause serious bodily injury.”
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 303(d) — 6 cases
Commonwealth v. Pestinikas, 617 A.2d 1339 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1992).
“" (emphasis supplied)); Section 303 of the Crimes Code, 18 Pa.C.S. § 303(d) (" Absolute liability When causing a particular result is a material element of an offense for which absolute liability is imposed by law, the element is not established, unless the actual result is a…”
Commonwealth v. Koch, 443 A.2d 1157 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1982).
“Section 3732 also requires the Commonwealth to prove that appellee's alleged violation of section 3703 caused the victim's death.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.