Court Opinion

ID: 9566062
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 19:32:55.748827+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:20:01.420567
License: Public Domain

Hunt, Chief Justice,
dissenting.
I do not disagree that the “footnote 3” charge fits this case and should have been given on this request. Jones did not request it, did not object to its omission, nor did she reserve objections to the charge.
Her specific objection was the sequence in which the potential offenses were reviewed by the trial court and that was her only objection. The opinion correctly holds that the charge was not sequential and, therefore, her conviction should be affirmed. I respectfully dissent.
I am authorized to state that Justice Hunstein and Justice Carley join in this dissent.