Opinion ID: 1735108
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Manslaughter Instruction, S-2A

Text: ¶ 26. On appeal, Reynolds argues that the trial court erred in not granting the State's lesser included offense/manslaughter jury instruction, S-2A. The record reflects that the defense objected to the manslaughter instruction being granted. When the State offered its manslaughter instruction, the following transpired: Court: What says the defendant? Defense: To which we object. Court: What's the basis of your objection? Defense: Substituting S-2 we object to on the grounds that there is no evidence warranting a manslaughter instruction in this case. (emphasis added). The trial court did not grant the manslaughter instruction. Reynolds did not object to the refusal. Reynolds did not offer any manslaughter instruction. ¶ 27. The State contends that this issue is waived on appeal for the defense's failure to make a contemporaneous objection to the refusal of the instruction. In fact, not only did the defense not object, the defense objected that the State requested a lesser-included offense instruction. In Nicholson ex rel. Gollott v. State, 672 So.2d 744, 752 (Miss.1996), the Court held that, Gollott failed to object to the refusal of D-4. As a result, this Court is not bound to address the alleged error on appeal. (citing Lockett v. State, 517 So.2d 1317, 1332-33 (Miss.1987)). ¶ 28. Furthermore, regardless of the fact that the defense objected to a manslaughter instruction being granted, the record does not reflect that a manslaughter instruction was proper. Based on the evidence presented, a manslaughter instruction was not warranted. Reynolds did not testify at trial. In the statement Reynolds made to the police, Reynolds never stated that she shot or killed Holliday. She made no mention of any struggle, fight or any altercation with Holliday. She told the police that she heard a noise, heard Holliday call her name and fall to the floor. Nothing in that statement warrants a manslaughter instruction. Even Reynolds's defense, at trial, stated that a manslaughter instruction was not warranted by the evidence. In Presley v. State, 321 So.2d 309, 310 (Miss.1975), this Court said: [T]he jury should not be instructed as to a lesser-included offense in such a way as to ignore the primary charge as this would be confusing to the jury. It is also true that if the evidence does not justify submission of a lesser-included offense, the court should refuse to do so. Unwarranted submission of a lesser offense is an invitation to the jury to disregard the law. (emphasis added). See Grace v. State, 375 So.2d 419, 420 (Miss.1979). ¶ 29. We find that this assignment of error is without merit.