Opinion ID: 397401
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Instruction to Decide Count Ten First

Text: 104 In its final instructions, the court charged the jury to deliberate first on Count Ten, the Underhill-Galanti murder count; if and only if they found Thevis guilty on that count, could they then consider the truth of the Underhill statements against Thevis as to Counts One and Two. Appellants requested this instruction, yet nevertheless contend on appeal that the instruction constituted plain error by giving the jury an artificial incentive to convict on Count Ten. According to appellants, the evidence of Thevis' guilt on Counts One and Two was plainly insufficient without Underhill's testimony. Thus, they continue, if the jury desired to convict Thevis on Counts One and Two, it could not do so unless it first found him guilty of Count Ten. 105 We find this assertion highly speculative. The instruction, moreover, actually served to benefit the defendants by providing a doublecheck on the trial court's earlier waiver ruling. 39 We therefore need not decide if the instruction constituted error; 40 we are satisfied that it did not constitute reversible plain error under the precedents cited above.