Nichols v. State, 2015 Ark. 274

Defendant Matthew W. Nichols was convicted by a Pulaski County jury of capital murder in the death of his cohabitant, Jesse McFadden; the State waived death and the court sentenced Nichols to life without parole as a habitual offender.
Evidence at trial included eyewitness testimony that Nichols poured gasoline on McFadden and ignited it, photographic and forensic evidence of extensive burns and a charred gas can at the scene, and expert testimony that McFadden died of thermal injuries and smoke inhalation.
Nichols testified and admitted pouring gasoline and lighting McFadden, claiming he did not intend to kill her and that the fire escalated accidentally; he sought to persuade the jury to consider first-degree murder as a lesser-included offense.
At trial Nichols requested a nonmodel modification of the AMI Crim. 2d 302 transition instruction to clarify that an individual juror (not the jury as a whole) may, if personally harboring reasonable doubt on capital murder, consider the lesser offense of first-degree murder.
The circuit court refused the proffered modification and instead gave the standard AMI Crim. 2d 302 instruction. Nichols appealed, arguing the refusal was an abuse of discretion because the standard wording was ambiguous.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the court abused its discretion by refusing Nichols’s nonmodel modification of AMI Crim. 2d 302	State: standard AMI instruction correctly states law; no ambiguity preventing juror consideration of lesser offense	Nichols: the word “you” in the model instruction is ambiguous and could be read to prevent an individual juror from transitioning to a lesser offense	Court: no abuse of discretion; AMI Crim. 2d 302 correctly states law and is not ambiguous when read with the full instructions and reasonable-doubt definition

Henderson v. State, 284 Ark. 493 (Ark. 1985) (nonmodel jury instructions permissibly given only when model instruction fails to state law or omits needed instruction)
Estelle v. McGuire, 502 U.S. 62 (1991) (jury instructions must be read in context; individual instructions not judged in artificial isolation)