Opinion ID: 1849099
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 15

Heading: whether the circuit court erred in denying the appellant's proffered jury instruction d-30, on the lesser included offense of manslaughter.

Text: ś 68. Conley argues the trial judge committed reversible error when he refused to grant jury instruction D-30, a manslaughter instruction, which reads as follows: Glen Conley has been charged with murder of Whitney Berry in Count No. 1 of the indictment. The lesser-included offense of this crime is manslaughter. If you find from the evidence in this case beyond a reasonable doubt that: 1. Glen Conley, on or about May 21, 1994 in Pike County, Mississippi, 2. killed Whitney Berry 3. by drowning her, and 4. Glen Conley was negligent and the negligence was so gross as to be tantamount to a wanton disregard of, or utter indifference to, the safety of human life, and 5. such negligence, if any, directly caused the death of Whitney Berry and further the drowning was not accidental then you shall find the defendant guilty of manslaughter. If the prosecution has failed to prove any one or more of the above listed elements beyond a reasonable doubt, then you shall find Glen Conley not guilty of the lesser included offense of manslaughter. ś 69. The trial judge held that this instruction was included in State's instruction S-2 which was granted. Instruction S-2 reads, in pertinent part: The Court further instructs the Jury that if all twelve of you are unable to unanimously agree on the above charges, you may consider the lesser-included offense of manslaughter by culpable negligence. If you believe from the evidence in this case, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant did unlawfully, feloniously and by his culpable negligence kill and slay one Whitney Berry, a human being, by then and there removing the personal flotation device from the said Whitney Berry, a human being, contrary to Mississippi law, and did allow the said Whitney Berry to enter the water without sufficient protection, then you should find the defendant guilty of manslaughter by culpable negligence, and the form of your verdict, which should be written on a separate sheet of paper and need not be signed, may be in the following form: We, the Jury, find the defendant guilty of manslaughter by culpable negligence. The Court further instructs the Jury that if you find the defendant not guilty of manslaughter by culpable negligence, the form of your verdict may be in the following form: We, the Jury, find the defendant not guilty of manslaughter by culpable negligence. ś 70. The State contends that this instruction properly sets out the standards for a negligence theory and that when read with all of the other instructions, the jury was properly instructed. However, it appears that the State's instruction failed to provide a proper guide for the jury. In Grinnell v. State, 230 So.2d 555, 558 (Miss. 1970), this Court defined culpable negligence as follows: [T]he term culpable negligence should be construed to mean a negligence of a higher degree than that which in civil cases is held to be gross negligence, and must be a negligence of a degree so gross as to be tantamount to a wanton disregard of, or utter indifference to, the safety of human life, and that this shall be so clearly evidenced as to place it beyond every reasonable doubt. The State's instruction fails to properly and fully define culpable negligence. Conley's denied jury instruction, however, comes closer to meeting the definitional standard set out in Grinnell and, therefore, may have been erroneously denied. ś 71. Grinnell, however, was an automobile accident case where the task for the jury was to determine whether Grinnell's conduct arose to the level of culpability. The choice was between guilt or innocence of manslaughter, and the jury found guilt of manslaughter. In the present case, the jury was allowed to find guilt of manslaughter and chose not to do so. Therefore, the failure of the instruction to include an adequate definition of culpable negligence is harmless. ś 72. The error did not contribute to the verdict as the jury unanimously agreed that Conley murdered Whitney Berry while engaged in the crime of kidnapping. Error is harmless if it is clear beyond a reasonable doubt that it did not contribute to the verdict. Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 87 S.Ct. 824, 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967). Therefore, although the trial court may have erred in refusing to grant Conley's manslaughter instruction containing an adequate definition of culpable negligence, it was harmless error.