Court Opinion

ID: 9561515
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 18:11:01.672484+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:13:50.782165
License: Public Domain

MACY, Chief Justice,
dissenting.
An accused has a right to have a theory-of-defense instruction given to the jury if the instruction is supported by competent evidence. Pearson v. State, 811 P.2d 704, 710 (Wyo.1991); McInturff v. State, 808 P.2d 190, 195 (Wyo.1991). The test is not whether there was any evidence but whether the evidence was competent.
It is inconceivable that a jury would find that Stagner did not know the vehicle was stolen in light of all the evidence to the contrary. This is especially true since the jury was instructed that it must find beyond a reasonable doubt that Stagner “knew, believed or had reasonable cause to believe [the Lincoln automobile] was obtained in violation of the law.”
Stagner’s constitutional right to a fair trial was satisfied.