8 results for 'cat:"Firearms" AND cat:"Jury" AND cat:"Murder"'.
J. Hixson finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for second-degree murder and employing a firearm. Officers testified that victim's wife called 911 after her husband ran from defendant's residence, bleeding and exclaiming he had been shot. A neighbor testified to the same events, and the weapon and shell casings were found in defendant's home. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Hixson , Filed On: February 7, 2024, Case #: CR-23-188, Categories: firearms, jury, murder
J. Bacon finds the trial court properly denied defendant's request for a provocation jury instruction because the driver of the other vehicle involved in the shooting was not the victim, and even if he had been, erratic driving is insufficient to require such an instruction. Furthermore, although defendant had been threatened by the driver of the other vehicle and knew he had guns, there was a vehicle in between the two and no shots had been fired at the time defendant opened fire, all of which prevented the issue of a self-defense instruction. Affirmed.
Court: New Mexico Supreme Court, Judge: Bacon, Filed On: December 4, 2023, Case #: S-1-SC-39211, Categories: firearms, murder, jury Instructions
[Consolidated.] J. Stiles finds that defendant was properly convicted and sentenced for murder and firearm possession stemming from a fatal shooting at a party. Defendant sought a mistrial based on a juror's alleged violation of a ban on research, but the juror had "simply researched the role of juries and courts" and not the case at issue. Affirmed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Stiles, Filed On: November 2, 2023, Case #: KA-23-189, Categories: firearms, murder, jury Instructions
J. Zayas finds that while the jury found defendant not guilty of the firearm specifications within the attempted murder charge, the trial court properly denied defendant's motion to set aside the attempted murder conviction. Testimony he was hired to commit the murder alongside several others and evidence he burned his clothing after the crime was sufficient to support the conviction. While the guilty verdict may have been somewhat inconsistent, given the victim died from a gunshot wound and defendant was found to not have been in possession of a weapon, the inconsistency can be explained by compromise or leniency on the part of the jury. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Zayas, Filed On: August 9, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-2742, Categories: firearms, jury, murder
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. McCarty finds the lower court properly convicted defendant of attempted murder and possession of a firearm by a felon for shooting a man twice after a confrontation in a parking lot. Defendant was sentenced to 20 years for attempted murder, and 10 years for the firearms charge, to be served consecutively. Despite defendant's argument, the jury was properly instructed, and the instant court finds no fault in the lower court’s determination Affirmed.
Court: Mississippi Court Of Appeals, Judge: McCarty, Filed On: August 8, 2023, Case #: 2022-KA-00398-COA, Categories: firearms, murder, jury Instructions
J. Raker agrees with the lower court’s decision that the jury should not have received voluntariness instructions in a trial where the court convicted a gun owner of murder. The gun owner, seen shooting a man on a closed circuit camera at a business, was positively identified and all other evidence supports this identification. There was also no evidence that the gun owner had been coerced by police into a false confession. Affirmed.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Raker, Filed On: July 7, 2023, Case #: 119248020, Categories: firearms, murder, jury Instructions
J. Hutchinson finds the trial court improperly convicted defendant for aggravated battery with a firearm and second-degree murder. The jury was mistakenly provided with the state’s closing argument PowerPoint presentation during deliberations. It cannot be said that the error and resulting prejudice was “harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.” Reversed.
Court: Illinois Appellate Court, Judge: Hutchinson , Filed On: June 28, 2023, Case #: 2-22-0178, Categories: firearms, jury, murder