Dawson v. State, F-80-700
| Decision Date | 18 June 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. F-80-700,F-80-700 |
| Citation | 647 P.2d 447 |
| Parties | Johnny Clifton DAWSON, Sr., Appellant, v. The STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee. |
| Court | United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma |
Johnny Clifton Dawson, Sr., was charged and convicted of Murder in the Second Degree in the District Court of Oklahoma County and sentenced to ten (10) years' imprisonment.
Evidence presented at trial showed that the appellant and the deceased were intoxicated as a result of drinking substantial amounts of beer and whiskey over an extended period of time. During the evening the appellant found a pistol which he tested to see if it would fire. The gun supposedly misfired several times before discharging. The appellant testified that the deceased then either bumped his arm or he accidentally hit the trigger causing the gun to fire and kill him. When originally questioned by the police, the appellant admitted attempting to fire the gun at the floor without it discharging. He said he then pointed the gun at the deceased and stated, "This thing wouldn't kill nothing or nobody." The appellant then pulled the trigger causing the death of the deceased.
The disposition of this appeal turns on the issue of whether the trial court erred in failing to instruct on the lesser included offense of manslaughter in the first degree. The jury was instructed on the crimes of murder in the second degree and manslaughter in the second degree. Defense counsel neither submitted instructions nor objected to those given.
In determining such issues, this Court has previously articulated and applied the following rule:
In a prosecution for murder, the court should instruct the jury on the law of each degree of homicide which the evidence tends to prove whether it be requested on the part of the defendant or not; and it is the duty of the court to decide, as a matter of law, whether there is any evidence that would tend to reduce the degree of the offense to manslaughter in the first degree.
In determining whether there is any evidence tending to reduce the degree of the homicide from murder to manslaughter, the trial court should give the defendant the benefit of any doubt which the evidence may suggest, and instruct the jury on the law of each degree which the evidence tends to prove, whether requested or not.
Provo v. State, 549 P.2d 354 (Okl.Cr.1976), appeal after remand, 565 P.2d 719, cert. denied 434 U.S. 1071, 98 S.Ct. 1255, 55 L.Ed.2d 774 (1978).
The State correctly submits that under the evidence in this case a first-degree manslaughter heat of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Shrum v. State
...though the instruction is not requested); Hall v. State, 1985 OK CR 38, ¶ 29, 698 P.2d 33, 39; Dawson v. State, 1982 OK CR 94, ¶ 4, 647 P.2d 447, 449 ("the court should instruct the jury on the law of each degree of homicide which the evidence tends to prove whether it be requested on the p......
-
Pickens v. State
...2387-2393, 65 L.Ed.2d 392 (1980); Schad v. Arizona, 501 U.S. 624, 644-48, 111 S.Ct. 2491, 2504-05, 115 L.Ed.2d 555 (1991); Dawson v. State, 647 P.2d 447 (Okl.Cr.1982).16 See, e.g., Crawford v. State, 840 P.2d 627, 638 (Okl.Cr.1992); Lamb v. State, 767 P.2d 887, 889-90 (Okl.Cr.1988); Biggers......
-
Koonce v. State
...II It is error for the trial court to not instruct the jury on a lesser included offense supported by the evidence. Dawson v. State, 647 P.2d 447 (Okl.Cr.1982). But the court is not required to instruct as to every conceivable offense, rather, only those reasonably supported by the evidence......
-
Stewart v. State, F-85-351
...394, 402 (Okla.Crim.App.1987); Webb v. State, 732 P.2d 478, 479 (Okla.Crim.App.1987). The case cited by appellant, Dawson v. State, 647 P.2d 447, 448-49 (Okla.Crim.App.1982), is distinguishable. Unlike Dawson, here there was evidence that appellant had a design to effect death. Finally, we ......