Court Opinion

ID: 9739167
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 20:09:52.513411+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:10.390915
License: Public Domain

GIVAN, Justice,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion in their holding that the giving of Instruction Number 11 is reversible error. The basis for appellant's objection at trial was that the instruction was misleading and confusing in that it intermingled the elements of conspiracy to commit murder with the elements necessary to prove the offense of murder.
Assuming that the instruction was erroneous, the instructions, when taken as a whole, properly instruct the jury. We have held that the manner of instructing a jury les within the sound discretion of the trial court. Concepcion v. State (1991), Ind., 567 N.E.2d *262784. Jury instructions are to be read together as a whole and not as single units. Hurt v. State (1991), Ind., 570 N.E.2d 16.
The trial court gave detailed and separate instructions regarding the elements of murder and conspiracy. The trial court also instructed the jury to consider the instructions as a whole. Under the cireumstances, it is unrealistic to believe the jury was misled by the language of Instruction 11.
I would affirm the trial court in all respects.