Opinion ID: 2585204
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: The premeditated murder and felony-murder instruction

Text: The district court instructed the jury that it could convict Rhyne of first-degree murder under a theory of either premeditated and deliberate murder or felony murder, based on the robbery charge. Rhyne complains that because he was acquitted of robbery, there is no way to know which of the two theories the jury relied on to convict, and that the murder verdict is therefore infirm. We reject this contention. The United States Supreme Court has held that a jury may return a general guilty verdict on an indictment charging several acts in the alternative even if one of the possible bases of conviction is unsupported by sufficient evidence. [14] Specifically, as long as both theories are legally sufficient, the verdict will stand even if one theory is ultimately found to be factually unsupported by the evidence. [15] We have applied this principle to charging alternative theories of first-degree murder. [16] Regardless of whether there was sufficient evidence of robbery, there is sufficient evidence to support a verdict of premeditated and deliberate murder. [17] Rhyne was properly convicted of first-degree murder.