Court Opinion

ID: 9647210
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 13:26:36.618581+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:11:46.572170
License: Public Domain

STEPHENSON, Justice,
dissenting.
I am in complete agreement with the excellent analysis and definition of extreme emotional disturbance contained in the majority opinion.
However, I do not believe that the circumstances of this case warrant an instruction on criminal trespass. Had McClellan testified that he blacked out and remembered nothing, that would be the defendant’s theory of the case and require an appropriate instruction. This theory is entirely subjective. Here, the testimony that he did not intend to commit a crime when he entered the room, after shooting off the lock and then proceeding to murder the victim and kidnap his wife, should be tested objectively by the jury. While McClellan’s testimony can be considered by the jury on intent to murder, the facts here are such that, in my opinion, a criminal trespass instruction is not required.
The direct testimony of the Dean of Christ Church that McClellan was sincere and was sorry for his acts is incompetent and irrelevant; thus the cross-examination complained of can hardly be characterized as prejudicial.
Neither do I believe that McClellan was entitled to an instruction on unlawful imprisonment in the second degree.
Accordingly, I dissent.
WINTERSHEIMER, J., joins in this dissent.