Opinion ID: 1210155
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Asserted Misreading of Instruction

Text: (14) From the reporter's transcript it appears that the court gave an instruction concerning provocation that began: When an assault, in a case such as this, is committed in a heat of passion.... [6] (Italics added.) The word charge was used in the instruction as requested instead of the italicized word, and defendants assert that as a result of the inadvertent change in language it could be inferred from the instruction as given that the prosecution had made out its case of assault. However, the instructions as a whole made it clear that whether there was an assault was one of the issues for the jury to decide, and the trial judge specifically told the jury, I have not intended by anything I have said ... to intimate or suggest what you should find to be the facts ... and if anything I have... said has seemed to so indicate, you will disregard that intimation and form your own opinion without regard thereto. The judgment entered against Cannady is modified to provide a punishment of life imprisonment instead of death and as so modified is affirmed. The judgment entered against Beard is affirmed.