## Facts

- Willie Tripp had a long-term romantic relationship with Hazel Wilson; conflict arose from his jealousy over her drinking and visits to her husband.
- After a quarrel, Wilson moved to her mother’s residence.
- Four days later, Tripp engaged in preparatory conduct to gain entry, including putting on gloves, altering a basement lock, and inducing Wilson’s mother to let him in.
- Tripp shot and killed Wilson inside the residence.
- Tripp then shot four of Wilson’s family members, killing three and seriously wounding one.
- After leaving the scene, Tripp went grocery shopping.
- At trial on multiple counts of first-degree murder, Tripp requested a jury instruction on voluntary manslaughter based on “heat of passion.”
- The trial court declined to instruct on manslaughter and limited its homicide instructions to murder.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence generated a jury question on heat-of-passion mitigation requiring an instruction on voluntary manslaughter.
2. Whether a trial judge must instruct on manslaughter (and other homicide categories) as a matter of course, even when unsupported by the evidence.

## Decision

- The court affirmed the first-degree murder convictions.
- The trial court did not err in refusing a voluntary manslaughter instruction because the evidence did not support legally adequate provocation, sudden passion, or lack of reasonable cooling time.
- The trial court was not required to give broad homicide instructions describing lesser offenses that were not generated by the evidence.

## Legal Principles

- Murder is unmitigated unlawful homicide; manslaughter is mitigated unlawful homicide.
- When the State proves an intentional killing, non-mitigation is presumed; the prosecution need not disprove mitigation unless the defendant produces evidence sufficient to raise a genuine jury issue on mitigation.
- A defendant seeking a voluntary manslaughter instruction bears a threshold burden of production to show evidence of adequate provocation, heat of passion, and insufficient cooling time.
- Trial courts should instruct only on those homicide theories supported by the evidence; unnecessary “boilerplate” instructions on unsupported lesser offenses may confuse the jury and are not required.

## Conclusion

Because the record showed deliberation, preparation, and ample cooling time rather than a legally sufficient heat of passion, the defendant failed to generate a mitigation issue, so the trial court properly limited the jury’s consideration to murder and declined to instruct on voluntary manslaughter.


Tripp v. State, 374 A.2d 384 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1977)