Opinion ID: 1688901
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Great Care and Caution Jury Instruction

Text: ¶ 62. Slaughter contends that the trial court erred in refusing jury instruction D-5 and D-unnumbered pertaining to a great care and caution instruction. Slaughter claims that Richardson was an accomplice to the murder. In addition, Slaughter maintains that should this Court agree with his immunity argument, then the great care and caution instruction should also apply to Murray, Seldon and Dugan. We find that there was no error in excluding the proffered testimony as to Murray, Seldon and Dugan's federal immunity and, therefore, no such instruction should apply to them. ¶ 63. Jury Instruction D-5 read as follows: The testimony of an alleged accomplice is to be considered and weighed with great care and caution and suspicion. You may give it such weight and credit as you deem it is entitled. Jury instruction D-unnumbered reads as follows: The testimony of one who provides evidence against the defendant for immunity from punishment must always be examined and weighed by the jury with greater care and caution than the testimony of ordinary witnesses. You the jury should consider and weigh such testimony with great care and caution and suspicion. You may give it such weight and credit as you deem it is entitled. Both instructions were refused by the trial court. While Slaughter maintains that Richardson was an accomplice, she was actually indicted by the State of Mississippi as an accessory after the fact, not an accomplice.