Opinion ID: 1837791
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: did the lower court err in failing to instruct the jury on the lesser included offense of trespass less than larceny?

Text: We refer to the facts hereinabove. Jury instructions should not be given unless there is evidence to support them. Lancaster v. State, 472 So.2d 363, 365 (Miss. 1985); Barnes v. State, 457 So.2d 1347, 1349 (Miss. 1984). The principle applies where the defendant seeks to have the court authorize the jury to find him guilty of a lesser-included offense. The instruction must be warranted by the evidence. Stevens v. State, 458 So.2d 726, 731 (Miss. 1984). Accord, Messer v. State, 483 So.2d 338, 340 (Miss. 1960). In the case at bar, the appellant sought to have the jurors instructed that they could find him guilty of trespass less than larceny. The court refused the instruction with this ruling: I believe that this case is all or nothing. I don't think there is any proof that shows, either by the State or by the defendant, ... a lesser included offense would be authorized. Again, we are of the opinion that there is no evidence to support a lesser included offense of trespass. Appellant's position is: (1) he was not present when the vehicle was stolen, and (2) he hitched a ride in the automobile with a person named Larry. His defense was an alibi that he was not present when the automobile was stolen. This is not a case where the defendant/appellant claimed he was joy riding or that he was using the vehicle for a brief period and expected to return it. The lower court correctly refused the lesser-included offense instruction. Issue number four is rejected.