## Facts

- Jason Alcindor and Raquel Coore ended their romantic relationship in February 2016; their daughter was born in October 2016.
- By March 2017, Coore was dating Timothy Campbell, who was hostile toward Alcindor.
- Campbell repeatedly called and texted Alcindor with taunts and threats, often after disputes between Coore and Alcindor about their child.
- On the evening of the killing, Coore arranged to meet Alcindor at a Royal Farms convenience store to pick up their daughter.
- Without telling Alcindor, Coore brought Campbell to the meeting.
- Campbell approached Alcindor, got close to his face, and taunted him about Coore and their relationship.
- A fistfight began; Alcindor tried to walk away, but Campbell tore Alcindor’s shirt during the confrontation.
- Campbell wrapped a belt around his hand during the fight.
- Alcindor had a knife; Coore briefly got control of the knife, but Alcindor slammed her to the ground and regained it.
- Campbell attempted to retreat, and Coore tried to stop Alcindor by screaming and striking him with her car, but Alcindor continued fighting.
- Alcindor stabbed Campbell 26 times; Campbell died from the wounds.
- Alcindor testified he was scared, had been struck in the back of the head, and could not remember much of what happened once the stabbing started.
- The jury watched two videos of the incident; after viewing them, Alcindor described himself as being in “some sort of passion.”
- The trial court instructed the jury on murder and self-defense but refused Alcindor’s requested instruction on voluntary manslaughter based on hot-blooded response to adequate provocation; the jury convicted Alcindor of second-degree murder, and he was sentenced to 30 years.

## Issues

1. Did the trial court err by refusing to instruct the jury on voluntary manslaughter (hot-blooded response to adequate provocation) where there was some evidence to support that mitigation theory?
2. Did the trial court abuse its discretion by limiting an eyewitness’s testimony about who started the fight?
3. Did the trial court abuse its discretion by allowing the State to argue facts not in evidence during closing argument?

## Decision

- Yes. The appellate court held there was some evidence from which a reasonable jury could find voluntary manslaughter based on adequate provocation and heat of passion.
- The court vacated Alcindor’s second-degree murder conviction and remanded for a new trial.
- Because the instructional error required reversal, the court did not decide Alcindor’s remaining appellate claims.

## Legal Principles

- A defendant is entitled to a requested instruction on a lesser-included offense when there is “some evidence” that would permit a rational jury to convict on the lesser offense and acquit on the greater offense.
- In deciding whether “some evidence” exists, the trial court does not weigh credibility and must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the defendant.
- Voluntary manslaughter by hot-blooded response to adequate provocation requires some evidence of: (1) legally adequate provocation, (2) heat of passion, (3) no reasonable opportunity to cool, and (4) a causal connection between the provocation, the passion, and the killing.
- A defendant’s particular word choice about his emotions (including denying he was “enraged”) does not control whether the jury may find heat of passion; the jury may infer that state from the events, the pace of the confrontation, and the defendant’s reactions.
- When the evidence could support a finding that the killing occurred during a continuous confrontation without time for cooling, the mitigation question must be left to the jury through proper instruction.

## Conclusion

The court ordered a new trial because the record contained some evidence that Campbell’s confrontation and the rapid escalation into violence could constitute adequate provocation and that Alcindor acted in a heat-of-passion state without time to cool, so the jury should have been given the option to return a voluntary manslaughter verdict rather than being limited to murder and self-defense.


Alcindor v. State, 2020 WL 4334896 (2020)