## Facts

- Ollie James Pouncey and two friends confronted Mr. Bland about an allegedly stolen car and then returned to a friend’s house.
- Bland later arrived with his older brother and Steven Powers; an argument continued outside the house.
- Powers threatened Pouncey and insulted him; Powers moved toward Pouncey but was restrained, and there was no physical contact.
- Pouncey testified Powers was unarmed.
- Pouncey went inside the house, retrieved a shotgun from a closet, and returned outside about thirty seconds later.
- Pouncey told another person to hit Powers with a monkey wrench; the swing missed.
- Pouncey shot Powers in the abdomen, killing him.
- At trial, Pouncey’s testimony indicated he was not angry or out of control when he shot.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence of provocation (threats, insults, and a restrained advance without physical contact) was sufficient to require a voluntary manslaughter jury instruction.
2. Whether the trial court erred by refusing the requested voluntary manslaughter instruction, requiring reversal of convictions.

## Decision

- The Michigan Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and reinstated the trial court’s judgment of conviction.
- The Court held the evidence did not support a voluntary manslaughter instruction.
- The Court concluded the trial judge did not err in refusing to instruct the jury on voluntary manslaughter.
- The convictions for second-degree murder and felony-firearm remained in effect.

## Legal Principles

- Voluntary manslaughter mitigation requires proof that: (1) the defendant killed in the heat of passion, (2) the passion was caused by adequate provocation, and (3) there was no lapse of time in which a reasonable person could regain self-control.
- Words alone generally do not constitute adequate provocation; threats and insults without a physical attack or weapon ordinarily are insufficient.
- A trial court must instruct on a lesser offense only when the proofs would permit conviction of the lesser and acquittal of the greater under a rational view of the evidence.
- Leaving the confrontation to retrieve a weapon and then returning may support a finding of cooling time and deliberation inconsistent with heat-of-passion killing.

## Conclusion

Because the record showed no adequate provocation, no heat-of-passion killing, and time for a reasonable person to regain control before returning armed, the trial court properly refused a voluntary manslaughter instruction, and the defendant’s convictions were reinstated.


People v. Pouncey, 437 Mich. 382, 471 N.W.2d 346 (Mich. 1991)