Opinion ID: 1756872
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Acquittal First Argument

Text: Appellant argues that allowing the State to argue the jury had to acquit [Appellant] of first-degree murder to consider second-degree murder was plain error contrary to law. The jury instruction for second degree murder provides, If you do not find the defendant guilty of murder in the first degree, you must consider whether he is guilty of murder in the second degree. MAI-CR3d 314.04 (emphasis added). In closing arguments, the State read the instruction and explained you're considering Murder in the First Degree, which is only if you decide that he didn't commit Murder in the First Degree that you even get to Murder in the Second Degree.  (Emphasis added). An acquittal first instruction requires the defendant to be acquitted of the greater offense before the lesser offense is considered. An acquittal first instruction is: [i]f you determine that the defendant is not guilty of the crime of ____ you may consider the lesser included crime of ____. State v. Allen, 301 Or. 35, 717 P.2d 1178, 1180 (1986) (citing comments to UCrJI No. 1009, Uniform Criminal Jury Instruction for Lesser Included Offense Order of Deliberation). Thus, if an acquittal is first required, a deadlocked jury could not consider a lesser offense. State v. Wise, 879 S.W.2d 494, 517 (Mo. banc 1994) ( overruled on other grounds by Joy v. Morrison, 254 S.W.3d 885 (Mo. banc 2008)). However, an acquittal first argument will be upheld if the strength of the evidence of deliberation precludes a finding of prejudice. Tisius, 183 S.W.3d at 217. The second-degree murder jury instruction in Missouri, MAI-CR3d 314.04, is not an acquittal first instruction. Wise, 879 S.W.2d at 517. The instruction does not require the defendant to be found not guilty on the greater offense, first-degree murder, before the lesser-included offense, second-degree murder, is considered. Id. Instead, a lesser-included offense may be considered if the jury does not find the defendant guilty of the greater offense. Id. Thus, a lesser-included offense may be considered when the jury is deadlocked on the greater offense. Id. The difference between the State's closing argument and MAI-CR3d 314.04 is minimal. Regardless, this Court assumes that the jury followed the instruction of the court, see State v. Bowman, 741 S.W.2d 10, 15 (Mo. banc 1987), which was a proper instruction mirroring MAI-CR3d 314.14. Additionally ... the strength of the evidence of deliberation precludes a finding of prejudice. Tisius, 183 S.W.3d at 217. [9]