Unformatted text preview: D entitled to have jury instructed as to all offenses where there is “reasonable theory from the evidence supporting his position.” Decision: Reversed. There were facts in evidence from which a jury might concluded that D only was negligent, not reckless, in his wife’s death. Rationale: Jury could have believed that his conduct was unintentional and he was unaware of risk because: he may have acted only reflexively after she bit him; he did not know there were bricks in yard when he slammed her head on grass. Dissent: Comments: Seems to me that slamming someone’s head on ground, even if you think it is only grass, is reckless!...
View Full Document
- Spring '07
- Law, head injury, trial judge, negligent homicide.