Opinion ID: 2153557
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: During deliberation, the jury sent a communication to the trial judge over the signature of the foreman as follows:

Text: We were advised in the last paragraph of instruction # 6 that Danny Paul Prewitt (sic) and Michelle Barlett (sic) are accomplices as defined as hereinabove. We are not told whether Donna Hineman (sic) is an accomplice or is not an accomplice. Will you tell us which she is? After conference with the prosecutor and defendant's counsel and after having secured their approval of the answer, the trial judge responded as follows: That issue is to be decided by the jury. Rule 197, R.C.P., provides: Additional instructions. While the jury is deliberating, the court may in its discretion further instruct the jury, in the presence of or after notice to counsel. Such instruction shall be in writing, be filed as other instructions in the case, and be a part of the record and any objections thereto shall be made in a motion for a new trial. No objection was made to the failure of the court to instruct on burden of proof, either with relation to the quantum of proof or with respect to the party upon whom the burden of proof is placed. Error was not preserved by the defendant for review here, and we give no consideration to this issue in this appeal. We find no reversible error and affirm the trial court. AFFIRMED.