Robert Lawrence Albores, Jr. v. State of Indiana, 987 N.E.2d 98

Albores was convicted of murder and sentenced to 55 years; he appeals the judgment.
Issue on appeal: whether the trial court abused its discretion by refusing a proposed jury instruction on the presumption of innocence.
During trial, State linked the shooting to rival gang activity; Albores admitted shooting Miranda but claimed it was not for a gang motive.
Jury was instructed on self-defense and reckless homicide; the court gave standard instructions on presumption of innocence and reasonable doubt.
Albores proposed an instruction reiterating the presumption of innocence and that the State must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; it was refused.
The appellate court ultimately held the court did not abuse its discretion because the instructions, read as a whole, conveyed the presumption of innocence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial court abused discretion by denying presumption instruction	Albores contends trial court abused discretion; instruction identical to Lee v. State.	Albores argues for instruction; State contends instructions already conveyed the presumption.	No abuse; instructions as a whole adequately conveyed presumption.

Robey v. State, 454 N.E.2d 1221 (Ind. 1983) (presumption of innocence must be given when requested if properly framed)
Simpson v. State, 915 N.E.2d 511 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (no reversible error when presumption instruction rejected if properly conveyed)
Smith v. State, 981 N.E.2d 1262 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (affirmed denial where instructions conveyed presumption in substance)
Lee v. State, 964 N.E.2d 859 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012) (instructions in Lee differed; but here instructions adequate overall)
O’Connell v. State, 970 N.E.2d 168 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012) (considered completeness when evaluating challenged instruction)
Boney v. State, 880 N.E.2d 279 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (pattern instructions preferred; used here)