Opinion ID: 2010756
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Superior Court's jury instruction was incorrect.

Text: A party is not entitled to a particular jury instruction; however, a party does enjoy the unqualified right to a correct statement of the law. [42] Therefore, we review a jury instruction actually given by the trial court to determine whether it correctly stated the law, and was not so confusing or inaccurate as to undermine either the jury's ability to reach a verdict or our confidence in their ability to do so fairly under the circumstances. [43] In this case, the trial judge instructed the jury that: If it is demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt that a Defendant recklessly fired shots along with others and a person's death was caused by one of those shots, or if it is proved beyond a reasonable doubt that [a] Defendant recklessly participated in an exchange of gunfire that caused a person's death, then the State need not prove that a particular shot, fired by a particular person caused the death. This instruction allowed the jury to convict Comer of felony murder solely on the basis of his participation in the gun battle, and without determining whether he, Williams, or Reeves fired the fatal shot. This is inconsistent with the agency theory of felony murder, which requires that the act of killing must be committed by either the defendant or by one acting in concert with him. Because the instructions did not correctly state the law and did not enable the jury to perform its duty, reversal of Comer's felony murder conviction is required. Nevertheless, this ruling does not necessarily require a new trial. This Court has the authority under Article IV, § 11(1)(b) of the Delaware Constitution to direct modification of a conviction to a lesser-included offense where it is clear that no undue prejudice will result to the defendant. [44] The agency theory does not apply to the crime of manslaughter, which is a lesser-included offense of felony murder and requires only that [t]he person recklessly causes the death of another person.... [45] Although it is unclear from the evidence presented at trial who fired the fatal bullet, the testimony of the State's witnesses, which was not refuted by evidence presented by the defense, establishes that Comer, Williams, and Reeves were engaged in a gun battle with Johnson, as a result of which Mitchell was killed. Therefore, the State presented evidence sufficient to convict Comer of the lesser-included offense of manslaughter. Accordingly, the State may elect to retry Comer for felony murder or accept entry of a judgment of conviction of manslaughter. [46]