substance of the proffered instruction in Indiana

2015In evaluating jury instructions on appeal, “this Court looks to whether the tendered instructions correctly state the law, whether there is evidence in the record to sup *723 port giving the instruction, and whether the substance of the proffered instruction is covered by other instructions.” Short v. State, 962 N.E.2d 146, 160 (Ind.Ct.App.2012). [15] Seal challenges the following instruction: Time is not an element of the crime of Child Molesting.

2013When evaluating a trial court’s rejection of tendered instructions, we look to: (1) whether the tendered instructions correctly state the law (2) whether there is evidence in the record to support giving the instruction, and (3) whether the substance of the proffered instruction is covered by other instructions. 15 Id.

2023Id. [36] “To employ self-defense, ‘a defendant must satisfy both an objective and subjective standard: he must have actually believed deadly force was necessary to protect himself, and his belief must be one that a reasonable person would have held under the circumstances.’” Passarelli v. State, 201 N.E.3d 271 , 276 (Ind. Ct. App. 2023) (quoting Littler v. State, 871 N.E.2d 276, 279 (Ind. 2007)), trans. denied.

2015“When evaluating the jury instructions on appeal this Court looks to whether the tendered instructions correctly state the law, whether there is evidence in the record to support giving the instruction, and whether the substance of the proffered instruction is covered by other instructions.” Treadway, 924 N.E.2d at 636 .

2016Dye v. State, 717 N.E.2d 5, 20 (Ind. 1999), reh’g denied.

2010Dye v. State, 717 N.E.2d 5, 20 (Ind.1999), reh'g denied.

2019When evaluating the trial court’s refusal to give a party’s tendered jury instruction, we determine “whether the tendered instructions correctly state the law, whether there is evidence in the record to support giving the instruction, and whether the substance of the proffered instruction is covered by other instructions.” Id. at 485 . [7] In determining whether to instruct a jury on a lesser included offense, the trial court must engage in a three-step analysis: First, the trial court must consider whether the alleged lesser included offense is an inherently included offense to the principal

2016“When evaluating the jury instructions on appeal this Court looks to whether the tendered instructions correctly state the law, whether there is evidence in the record to support giving the instruction, and whether the substance of the proffered instruction is covered by other instructions.” Id.

2023Id. [36] “To employ self-defense, ‘a defendant must satisfy both an objective and subjective standard: he must have actually believed deadly force was necessary to protect himself, and his belief must be one that a reasonable person would have held under the circumstances.’” Passarelli v. State, 201 N.E.3d 271 , 276 (Ind. Ct. App. 2023) (quoting Littler v. State, 871 N.E.2d 276, 279 (Ind. 2007)), trans. denied.

2016“Jury instructions are to be considered as a whole and in reference to each other; error in a particular instruction will not result in reversal unless the entire jury charge misleads the jury as to the law of the case.” Flake v. State, 767 N.E.2d 1004, 1007 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002).

2001Whitney, 750 N.E.2d at 344 ; Chambers v. State, 734 N.E.2d 578, 580 (Ind.2000); Murrell v. State, 747 N.E.2d 567, 573 (Ind.Ct.App.2001), trans. denied.

2001Whitney, 750 N.E.2d at 344 ; Chambers v. State, 734 N.E.2d 578, 580 (Ind.2000); Murrell v. State, 747 N.E.2d 567, 573 (Ind.Ct.App.2001), trans. denied.