McKinley v. State


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2003-KA-00518-COA

Court of Appeals: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 05-18-2004
Opinion Author: King, C.J.
Holding: Affirmed

Additional Case Information: Topic: Aggravated assault - Self-defense instruction - Robinson instruction
Judge(s) Concurring: Bridges and Southwick, P.JJ., Thomas, Lee, Irving, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ.
Procedural History: Jury Trial
Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 02-20-2003
Appealed from: Choctaw County Circuit Court
Judge: Clarence E. Morgan, III
Disposition: CONVICTED OF FOUR COUNTS OF AGGRAVATED ASSAULT AND SENTENCED TO TWENTY YEARS ON EACH COUNT WITH THE SENTENCES TO RUN CONSECUTIVELY TO EACH OTHER FOR A TOTAL OF 80 YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS.
District Attorney: Doug Evans
Case Number: 2002-0033-CR

  Party Name: Attorney Name:  
Appellant: Emmanuel Rydell McKinley




RONALD STEPHEN WRIGHT



 

Appellee: State of Mississippi OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: CHARLES W. MARIS  

Synopsis provided by:

If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals
hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office.

Topic: Aggravated assault - Self-defense instruction - Robinson instruction

Summary of the Facts: Emmanuel McKinley was convicted on four counts of aggravated assault. He was sentenced to serve twenty years on each count. He appeals.

Summary of Opinion Analysis: McKinley argues that a jury instruction was incorrect, because there was no language in Counts III and IV instructing the jury to find him not guilty if he was acting in necessary self-defense. A party is entitled to have his theory of the case presented to the jury by instructions, provided that the evidence supports that theory. Here, there was no evidence presented at trial that McKinley was acting in self-defense when he shot the victims. McKinley also argues that another instruction which was given is a verbatim recitation of the instruction that was given in Robinson v. State, 434 So. 2d 206 (Miss. 1983), and therefore should have, but did not, conform to the dictates of Reddix v. State, 731 So. 2d 591 (Miss. 1999). Not only did McKinley fail to object to the instruction, but the instruction was erroneous in Robinson because the jury was not instructed as to the essential elements of aggravated assault. In this case, the jury at McKinley’s trial was provided more than adequate instruction on the essential elements of aggravated assault.


Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court