Opinion ID: 4556341
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Parole-Eligibility Instruction

Text: {¶ 126} Kirkland asked the trial court to instruct the jury as follows: Under no circumstances could Anthony Kirkland ever be released from prison on parole if under a sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole. Likewise, if you were to select one of the other two life imprisonment options, then Anthony Kirkland would in fact stay in prison for a minimum of either twenty-five or thirty full years before he could even be considered for parole much less actually being granted parole. The court did not give that instruction, but gave this one: During your deliberations you will decide whether Anthony Kirkland shall be sentenced to, one, life imprisonment without parole eligibility for 25 full years, or, two, life imprisonment 33 SUPREME COURT OF OHIO without parole eligibility for 30 full years, or, three, life imprisonment without the possibility of parole, or four, death. {¶ 127} Kirkland contends that without his proposed instruction, the jury probably thought a defendant sentenced to life would “be released in less time than the actual wording of the law allows.” However, we have rejected such claims and upheld instructions similar to the one the trial court gave here. State v. Davis, 116 Ohio St.3d 404, 2008-Ohio-2, 880 N.E.2d 31, ¶ 215-219; State v. Jackson, 107 Ohio St.3d 53, 2005-Ohio-5981, 836 N.E.2d 1173, ¶ 102-103. The instruction that was given adequately conveyed to the jurors when, if ever, Kirkland would be eligible for parole if they chose one of the life-sentence options. See Davis at ¶ 219 and Jackson at ¶ 103.