Opinion ID: 1736888
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: the trial court erred in instructing the jurors to return to the jury room and continue deliberating until they reached a verdict.

Text: ¶ 21. In Sharplin v. State, 330 So.2d 591, 596 (Miss.1976), this Court approved the following as the jury instruction that should be given by a trial judge to a deadlocked jury: I know that it is possible for honest men and women to have honest different opinions about the facts of a case, but if it is possible to reconcile your differences of opinion and decide this case, then you should do so. Accordingly, I remind you that the court originally instructed you that the verdict of the jury must represent the considered judgment of each juror. It is your duty as jurors to consult with one another and to deliberate in view of reaching agreement if you can do so without violence to your individual judgment. Each of you must decide the case for yourself, but only after an impartial consideration of the evidence with your fellow jurors. In the course of your deliberations, do not hesitate to reexamine your own views and change your opinion if you are convinced it is erroneous, but do not surrender your honest convictions as to the weight or effect of the evidence solely because of the opinion of your fellow jurors or for the mere purpose of returning a verdict. Please continue your deliberations. See also Bolton v. State, 643 So.2d 942, 944-45 (Miss.1994). Having compared the charge promulgated in Sharplin to the one actually used by the trial court, we conclude that there is no substantive difference. Indeed, the only differences at all are the substitution of the word differing for different in the first line and the insertion of the word will so that the first sentence of the second paragraph reads I will remind you instead of I remind you. As these differences are negligible and could easily be the result of errors in the transcript, we find this issue to be without merit.