Criminal Negligence Issues - Essay Example

The evidence in the case pointed out that the offender was not guilty of “the lesser included offense” only as required by the test. The offender was aware of the impact of his conduct on the victim and he voluntarily loaded the gun to cause harm to the victim which he succeeded in committing.

Use of manslaughter as a lesser included offense to murder is possible in the circumstance where "the offender causes the death of another person involuntarily" (Pearson Education Inc., 2012, p. 123). There should be evidence that the offender’s reckless conducts were responsible for the death of the victim. The risks involved in the situation whereby the offender acted recklessly must pose rights of such magnitude that an ordinary person should have acted with care to avoid causing harm to other persons.

The element of self-defense is a countermeasure taken by a person to prevent harm to the body, property, or a third party (Pearson Education Inc., 2012). Self-defense usually results in to harm the would-be offender. A person claiming to have acted in self-defense could not have acted accidentally or recklessly because the appellant knew the danger that would have been caused by the conduct of another person and has to take measures voluntarily to avoid or minimize the consequences of the risks. For example, the defendant in this case took out a gun and loaded it with the intent to drive away the victim. His conduct was intentional and he acted consciously. In self-defense, a person acts voluntarily; consciously, and cautiously thus it cannot be accidental or reckless.

In the case of Johnson v. Texas, the appellant shot dead his accomplice Lean Freeman after an argument in which the offender was demanding his illegitimate money. The trial court had sentenced the offender to seventy-seven years for the crime of murder, but in his appeal, the defendant pointed out three mistakes committed by the trial court. He requested the appellate court to reverse the ruling of the trial court against overruling the defendant's request for lesser included offense charges, ineffective assistance of counsel, and prosecutorial misconduct. The appellant requested the lesser included charge of involuntary manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide by adding that his acts were in self-defense. The appellate court examined the issues under the Royster test and decided that the appellant acted voluntarily and consciously with the intent to cause harm to the victim.

The appellate claim of self-defense was irresponsible because he took time to load the gun and shoot the victim. The claim that the defendant acted in self-defense cannot be substantiated because there was no evidence of any assault caused by the victim or any confirmation that he carried a gun with him (Pearson Education Inc., 2012). Furthermore, involuntary manslaughter would require a person to act involuntarily and recklessly. However, the appellant was not reckless considering the time he took to load the gun and point it at the victim after they argued. His actions were planned carefully after the argument.