Springer v. State

The Court concludes that no additional instruction was required regarding negligence and that "no reasonable interprétation of the facts suggests that Defendant's conduct was merely negligent." Op. at 485. I respectfully dissent, believing, as did the Court of Appeals, that the trial court erred in refusing to give the defendant's tendered instructions defining "recklessly" and "negligence."

The charging information alleged that criminal recklessness occurred when the defendant "discharged a .45 caliber handgun causing the bullet/projectile to enter the chest of Jonathan Windell" (R. at 14).…