LaDawn Shrieves King v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 64 Va. App. 580

On Nov. 20, 2012, LaDawn Shrieves King (appellant) shot Dwayne King (her husband); he testified he awoke to a gunshot and saw appellant with a gun; appellant fled.
Appellant testified she intended to commit suicide, loaded a gun, King struggled to disarm her, the gun discharged during the struggle, wounding King; she then hid the gun and left.
Medical records (doctor did not testify) noted King was “shot by his girlfriend accidentally,” corroborating appellant’s accident theory.
Appellant was convicted by a jury of malicious wounding and use of a firearm in the commission of a felony; sentenced to 8 years.
Appellant proffered a jury instruction (Instruction L) stating the Commonwealth must prove the wounding was not accidental; the trial court refused it, saying existing instructions adequately covered intent/malice.
On appeal, the Virginia Court of Appeals (en banc) reversed and remanded for a new trial, holding the trial court erred by denying the accident instruction when supported by more than a scintilla of evidence.

Issue	Commonwealth's Argument	Appellant's Argument	Held
Whether trial court erred by refusing appellant’s proposed accident instruction	Given malice/intent instructions, law was already covered; instruction L was unnecessary or improperly stated law (relying on Waters)	Evidence (appellant’s testimony and medical record) supplied more than a scintilla supporting accident; jury should be told Commonwealth must disprove accident beyond a reasonable doubt	Reversed: when more than a scintilla of evidence supports a defense, trial court must give a properly stated instruction affirmatively presenting that defense; denial was reversible error

Martin v. Commonwealth, 218 Va. 4 (Va. 1977) (accident instruction required when supported by evidence and prosecution must bear burden to disprove accident)
Waters v. Commonwealth, 39 Va. App. 72 (Va. Ct. App. 2002) (refusal of accidental-killing instruction upheld where accidental killing occurred during commission of unlawful act; court relied on other instructions)
Cooper v. Commonwealth, 277 Va. 377 (Va. 2009) (standard for reviewing refusal of proffered instructions; scintilla-of-evidence test discussion)
Jimenez v. Commonwealth, 241 Va. 244 (Va. 1991) (trial court has affirmative duty to properly instruct jury on vital legal principles)
Bryant v. Commonwealth, 216 Va. 390 (Va. 1975) (defendant entitled to instruction affirmatively stating defense—consent—when supported by evidence)