McNeill v. State, 6 Div. 9
| Decision Date | 15 July 1986 |
| Docket Number | 6 Div. 9 |
| Citation | 496 So.2d 108 |
| Parties | John Maso McNEILL v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Donald L. Colee, Jr. of Ackerman, Colee & Tucker, Birmingham, for appellant.
Charles A. Graddick, Atty. Gen., and P. David Bjurberg, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
John Maso McNeill was convicted for the capital murder-robbery of Estell L. Samuels and sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.
The trial judge improperly refused to instruct the jury that manslaughter was a lesser included offense of the capital murder charged in the indictment. McNeill argues that there was sufficient evidence of his intoxication at the time of the homicide to furnish a reasonable theory that he did not have the intent necessary to commit intentional murder and was only guilty of manslaughter.
At trial, there was testimony that McNeill was intoxicated when the crime occurred, as evidenced by the comment of the trial judge at the sentencing hearing:
The trial judge refused to charge the jury on manslaughter because intoxication "didn't fit" the manslaughter statute.
The trial judge instructed the jury on the offense of the capital murder-robbery charged in the indictment and specifically charged, "If you feel that there was an inability to form an intent, then, of course, that being one of the essential elements of this capital offense, there can be no finding of guilt." He also charged on the lesser included offenses of felony-murder, intentional murder, and robbery and on the defense of intoxication.
Defense counsel specifically objected to the court's "failure to give requested charge No. 21, which calls for the lesser included offense of manslaughter."
The failure of the trial court to give the requested instruction on manslaughter was error. "When the crime charged involves a specific intent, such as murder, and there is evidence of intoxication, the trial judge should instruct the jury on the lesser included offense of manslaughter." Gray v. State, 482 So.2d 1318, 1319 (Ala.Cr.App.1985). "No matter how strongly the facts may suggest that appella...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lindsay v. State
...of intoxication, the trial judge should instruct the jury on the lesser included offense of manslaughter." ’ McNeill v. State, 496 So.2d 108, 109 (Ala. Cr. App. 1986) (quoting Gray v. State, 482 So.2d 1318, 1319 (Ala. Cr. App. 1985) )."It is clear that ‘[a] defendant is entitled to a charge......
-
Sockwell v. State
...of intoxication, the trial court should instruct the jury on the lesser included offense of manslaughter. Id.; McNeill v. State, 496 So.2d 108, 109 (Ala.Crim.App.1986). However, a charge on a lesser included offense is not warranted where the lesser included offense is incompatible with the......
-
Gurley v. State
...446 So.2d 675, 682 (Ala.Cr.App.1983) (capital offense of murder of two persons in a single transaction); applied in McNeill v. State, 496 So.2d 108, 109 (Ala.Cr.App.1986) (capital offense of murder during a Fletcher v. State, 621 So.2d at 1020. When the crime charged is intentional murder "......
-
Whitehead v. State
...the jury on the lesser included offense of manslaughter.' Gray v. State, 482 So.2d 1318, 1319 (Ala. Cr.App.1985)." McNeill v. State, 496 So.2d 108, 109 (Ala.Cr.App.1986).' "551 So.2d at 426. However, to negate the specific intent required for a murder conviction, the degree of the accused's......