Opinion ID: 1722313
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 10

Heading: instructions on defense theory of the case

Text: Defendant claims error in the trial court's refusal to give certain requested instructions on the defense theory of the case. The court denied the following instructions: It is the defendant's theory of the case that Robert Lee Williams did not see George Johnson on the stairwell of the apartment building at 1733 North Cambridge on the afternoon of November 4, 1973. It is further the defendant's theory of the case that the circumstances surrounding the taking of the statements of George Johnson was such that the statements are not trustworthy or reliable. It is further the defendant's theory of the case that George Johnson did not on November 4, 1973, between the hours of 3:15 p.m. and 5:00 p.m., at 1733 North Cambridge Street, Apartment #312, in the City and County of Milwaukee, State of Wisconsin, intentionally and feloniously cause the death of Cynthia Johnson, d. o. b. 4/24/48, another human being, with intent to kill said person. [14] The first instruction, asserting the theory that Williams did not see the defendant, seems simply to raise the question of Williams' credibility and the accuracy of his identification. The jury was adequately instructed with respect to both credibility and identification of a defendant. Generally, in instructing on the rules for determining the credibility of witnesses the court should not single out any particular witness. Koss v. State, 217 Wis. 325, 333, 258 N.W. 860 (1935). There was no need for the court to give the first requested instruction. The second instruction dealt with the reliability of defendant's confession. The jury was given Wis. Jury InstructionCriminal Nos. 180 and 182 which cover the points made in defendant's instruction. The third requested instruction is simply the charging portion of the complaint, with the addition of the word not. It is simply a denial of the crime, the equivalent of a plea of not guilty. This theory was adequately covered when the court, at the opening of its charge to the jury, read the charging portion of the complaint, and continued: To this charge in this criminal complaint, ladies and gentlemen, the defendant has entered a plea of not guilty, which means a denial of every material allegation in the complaint. There was no error in refusing the defendant's theory of the defense instructions.