“The
giving or refusal of jury instructions by a circuit court is reviewed under an abuse-of-discretion
standard.” Howell v. Equip. Inc., 170 So. 3d 592, 599 (¶16) (Miss. Ct. App.
2014). “[T]his Court does not review
jury instructions in isolation; rather, they are read as a
whole to determine if the jury was properly instructed.” Mitchell
v. Barnes, 96 So. 3d 771,
775 (¶9) (Miss. Ct. App. 2012) (quoting Burton
ex rel. Bradford v. Barnett, 615 So. 2d 580,
583 (Miss. 1993)). “Defects in specific
instructions do not require reversal where all instructions
taken as a whole fairly—although not perfectly—announce the applicable primary
rules of law.” Id. (internal quotation
marks omitted).
“However, if those instructions
do not fairly or adequately instruct the jury, we can and will reverse.” Id. "When analyzing the grant or refusal of a jury instruction, two questions
should be asked:
Does the instruction contain a correct
statement of law and is the instruction warranted
by the evidence?” Mitchell, 96 So. 3d at 775 (¶9) (quoting Beverly Enters. Inc. v. Reed, 961 So. 2d 40, 43 (¶8) (Miss.
2007)). With respect to the latter
question, a “defendant
is entitled to have jury instructions given which present his theory of the
case” when
there exists a “foundation in the evidence” for the instructions. Coho
Resources Inc. v. McCarthy, 829 So. 2d 1, 23
(¶69) (Miss. 2002) (quoting Higgins v. State, 725 So. 2d 220, 223
(Miss. 1998)).
No comments:
Post a Comment