Opinion ID: 1887629
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: whether it was error for the trial court to instruct the jury on depraved heart murder without requiring the jury to find the statutory element of a depraved heart, acting regardless of human life.

Text: ¶ 31. The jury found Shaffer guilty of murder as defined in Miss.Code Ann. § 97-3-19(1)(b). (1) The killing of a human being without the authority of law by any means or in any manner shall be murder in the following cases: . . . (b) When done in the commission of an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved heart, regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual. Miss.Code Ann. § 97-3-19(1)(b) (1994). However, the jury was given an instruction that failed to include the element of evincing a depraved heart, regardless of human life. The state argues that because Shaffer objected to the instruction upon different grounds at trial, he is now procedurally barred from raising this issue on appeal. We disagree. Instructing the jury on every element of the charged crime is so basic to our system of justice that it should be enforced by reversal in every case where inadequate instructions are given, regardless of a failure to object or making a different objection at trial. Just as the State must prove each element of the offense, the jury must be correctly and fully instructed regarding each element of the offense charged. Failure to submit to the jury the essential elements of the crime is fundamental error....Indeed, [i]t is axiomatic that a jury's verdict may not stand upon uncontradicted fact alone. The fact must be found via jury instructions correctly identifying the elements of the offense under the proper standards. Where the jury had incorrect or incomplete instructions regarding the law, our review task is nigh unto impossible and reversal is generally required. It is rudimentary that the jury must be instructed regarding the elements of the crime with which the defendant is charged....Reversal on this issue is warranted. Hunter v. State, 684 So.2d 625, 636 (Miss. 1996) (internal citations omitted). In Hunter we found that reversible error occurred even though the defendant had not submitted a suitable instruction, because the State was obligated to do so. Id. The jury was not instructed on an essential element of the crime charged, denying Shaffer of his fundamental right to due process. ¶ 32. A conviction is not valid where the prosecution does not prove each element of the charged offense beyond a reasonable doubt. Davis v. State, 586 So.2d 817, 819 (Miss.1991) It follows that a conviction is unenforceable where the jury does not find each element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. Where the jury is not even instructed on one of the vital elements of the offense, the conviction must not survive the scrutiny of this Court. ¶ 33. Eliminating the element of evincing a depraved heart, regardless of human life from the jury instruction on depraved heart murder in this case constituted reversible error. This Court, therefore finds that the conviction of murder and sentence of life imprisonment should be reversed and the matter should be remanded to the Jackson County Circuit Court for a new trial.