The case of Smallwood v. State of Maryland was heard by the Court of Appeals in 1995 and decided on August 1, 1996. The court discussed the use of circumstantial evidence to infer intent to kill in attempted murder or assault with intent to murder cases and concluded that such an inference is not supported by the facts of this case. Smallwood was diagnosed with HIV in 1991 and committed multiple robberies at gunpoint in which he sexually assaulted and raped his victims without using a condom. He was charged with attempted first-degree rape, robbery with a deadly weapon, assault with intent to murder, and reckless endangerment. Smallwood pled guilty to attempted first-degree rape and robbery with a deadly weapon and was convicted of assault with intent to murder, reckless endangerment, and all three counts of attempted second-degree murder. The case involves determining the legal implications when someone knowingly exposes another to the risk of HIV infection and the resulting risk of death from AIDS. The lower court's decision was not mentioned.

To be convicted of attempted murder or assault with intent to murder, the defendant must have had a specific intent to kill without legal justification or excuse. Intent to kill can be inferred from circumstantial evidence, but in Smallwood's case, the State's argument that he intended to kill by exposing his victims to HIV is not sufficiently probable to support a conviction for attempted murder or assault with intent to murder. Smallwood's convictions are reversed, and costs are to be paid by the respondent.