Opinion ID: 2209832
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: issues

Text: The jury was instructed regarding voluntary manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter, and reckless homicide, as lesser-included offenses of murder. Relying in part upon the prior statutory definition of serious bodily injury, as including bodily injury ... that causes death, [1] defendant contends that the trial court erred in refusing his tendered instruction regarding criminal recklessness as a lesser-included offense. However, the merits of this contention are irrelevant on appeal, as they were at trial, because the tendered instruction was otherwise insufficient, incomplete, and potentially confusing. An instruction which presents the jury with the definition of an uncharged criminal offense and authorizes the determination of guilt or innocence thereon, must explain the role of the crime as a lesser-included offense in order to place it in its proper context in the case. Smith v. State (1981), Ind., 422 N.E.2d 1179, 1184. For these reasons, the trial court properly refused the instruction. Judgment affirmed. SHEPARD, C.J., and DeBRULER, GIVAN and PIVARNIK, JJ., concur.