Opinion ID: 1660527
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: whether the trial court erred by refusing rogers' proposed jury instruction d-6a, which instructed the jury on malice aforethought.

Text: ¶ 23. Rogers further asserts that the trial court erred by refusing jury instruction D-6A which, according to his brief, states as follows: The Court instructs the jury that to prove the defendant acted with malice aforethought, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant acted with premeditation and deliberation. Deliberation requires that an individual under the same circumstances as James Rogers, as shown by the evidence in this case, give consideration to the intent to kill. There is no prescribed length of time for deliberation. However, instruction D-6A does not appear anywhere in the record. Neither is there another jury instruction which includes this language. This omission was addressed by the State, but Rogers did not address it in his rebuttal brief. ¶ 24. This issue is not properly before the Court. We cannot review the bare assertions in the parties' briefs, but must look to the record. See Burney v. State, 515 So.2d 1154, 1160 (Miss.1987); Harris v. State, 386 So.2d 393, 396 (Miss.1980). This issue is without merit.