The appellant was convicted of first-degree murder by a jury.
On appeal, he argued the trial judge erred by refusing to leave the included offence of manslaughter with the jury, by directing the jury to find he had the state of mind for murder if they concluded he was the shooter, and by improperly instructing the jury on after-the-fact conduct.
The Court of Appeal held that the trial judge did not err in removing manslaughter, as there was no air of reality to an unintentional killing.
While the trial judge erred in directing the jury on the state of mind for murder, the error was harmless and cured by the proviso, as the jury's finding of planning and deliberation necessarily included an intention to kill.
The appeal was dismissed.
