Opinion ID: 1133683
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 16

Heading: Whether Instruction 15 was supported by the evidence.

Text: ś 171. Rubenstein argues there was no evidence to support jury Instruction 15 which, in pertinent part, stated: Therefore, if you find from the evidence in this case beyond a reasonable doubt that on or about the 16th day of November, 1993, in Pike County, Mississippi, the defendant, Alan Michael Rubenstein, did wilfully, unlawfully, feloniously and of his malice aforethought, either alone or in cooperation with another kill and murder Krystal Ryan Perry. . . . ś 172. The proposed Instruction 15 had stated, either alone or in cooperation with another with whom he was then and there aiding and abetting. Defense counsel objected, stating the evidence did not support the instruction. The trial court agreed to take out the language, with whom he was then aiding and abetting, finding the instructions had to comply or comport with the proof and the reasonable inferences therefrom. This Court has held, [i]nferences and presumptions are a staple of our adversary system of fact finding. It is often necessary for the trier of fact to determine the existence of an element of the crimeâ that is, an `ultimate' or `elemental' factâ from the existence of one or more `evidentiary' or `basic' facts. Edwards v. State, 469 So.2d 68, 70 (Miss.1985). ś 173. Rubenstein's argument that the alone or in cooperation with another language was unsupported and improperly submitted to the jury is without merit. The defense's theory of the case was that someone else killed Annie, Darrell, and Krystal because Rubenstein could not have murdered the three people alone. In his opening statement, defense counsel stated: How does one person murder three people? You can imagine the mother of a child, while Daryl is being stabbed and his throat cut from the front to the back of his neck, she would be grabbing her child, fighting for her life and her child's life, and getting out of the cabin, screaming, yelling breaking open windows, breaking doors trying to get out, yet she has not one defensive stab wound. It is impossible for it to have happened that the way the State claims. It raises the reasonable question that these victims may not have been murdered in this cabin. ś 174. Furthermore, the defense questioned Lisa French about observing a green mini-van in front of the cabin. French testified that she saw a young man and a little girl walking around the cabin on November 12, 1993. She saw the same young man and a little girl outside playing on the front porch three or four days later. On cross-examination by the State, French testified that she could not be exact about when she saw the green van, but it was less than a week later. Likewise, on cross-examination of Dr. Bass, the defense asked if flies could have attached themselves to the bodies while the bodies were being unloaded from a van. Moreover, Stevens testified that Rubenstein told him that he had planned to have someone else commit the crimes, but he changed his mind. ś 175. The defense's theory and the evidence presented adequately support the trial court's instruction. Therefore, this issue is meritless.