Opinion ID: 1576778
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Jury Instruction Regarding Child Testimony

Text: ¶ 39. At trial, Williams requested that the jury be instructed to view the testimony of [Jane] in light of [her] age and understanding and to give it such weight and credit as you deem it is entitled. The trial court refused the instruction, and Williams argues on appeal that the refusal entitles him to a new trial. ¶ 40. Although this Court has held that a trial court may instruct the jury to view the testimony in the light of the child's age and understanding, we also have held that the trial court's granting of such an instruction is not mandatory, and its refusal to do so is not grounds for reversal. Robinson v. State, 662 So.2d 1100, 1106 (Miss.1995). See Bandy v. State, 495 So.2d 486, 493 (Miss.1986) (If the jury is to be instructed at all with respect to the testimony of a child, it should be told to view the testimony in the light of the child's age and understanding, not his veracity.). We also are mindful of the general rule that the trial judge should not give undue prominence to particular portions of the evidence in the instructions. Sanders v. State, 586 So.2d 792, 796 (Miss.1991). We find that the trial court did not err by refusing the proposed instruction.