Opinion ID: 846467
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: lester and ora jones

Text: Whenever the question whether there was an accident is central to a criminal case, a court's failure to instruct the jury on the defense of accident requires automatic reversal. Lester and Ora Jones established this law many years ago, and I would not overrule it. These two decisions recognize that a defendant is entitled to have the jury weighing the evidence against him or her be properly instructed. They also recognize the difficulty a defendant has in meeting a harmless error standard of review in the event of an instructional mistake. To prove that the failure to give an instruction on the defense of accident was not harmless, the defendant must be able to prove the jury's thought process. Yet, it is nearly impossible for anyone not in the jury room to know how a jury reached its verdict. Hence, it is one of the most basic tenets of our judicial system that a court cannot attempt to journey behind a jury's verdict or into the jury room. Lukity, supra at 509, 596 N.W.2d 607 (Michael F. Cavanagh J., dissenting).