State v. Sprang, 227 Ariz. 10

Sprang was charged with first-degree murder and later convicted of second-degree murder after the jury was instructed on that lesser offense over her objection.
The victim was found murdered in a Tucson motel, with strangulation and blunt-force head injury evidenced by the forensic pathologist.
Sprang challenged the jury instruction on the lesser-included offense and sought a new trial; the trial court denied.
On appeal, Sprang argued the second-degree instruction was improper and not supported by the evidence.
The Arizona Court of Appeals vacated the conviction and sentence, holding the trial court erred in instructing on second-degree murder.
The court noted the double jeopardy issue but retained the right to retry Sprang for second-degree murder if necessary.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred by giving a second-degree murder instruction	Sprang contends the instruction was improper and not supported by evidence.	Sprang argues no discretion to give the instruction since not requested and objected on different grounds.	Instruction was an abuse of discretion; not supported by evidence.
Whether the error was preserved and fundamental	Sprang preserved objection below but on different grounds; argues fundamental error.	Forfeiture applies absent fundamental error and no such error found.	Issue forfeited; no fundamental error shown.
Whether evidence warranted a second-degree instruction	Evidence suggested lack of premeditation or heat of passion could apply.	Evidence showed premeditation; no basis for second-degree instruction.	Evidence did not support second-degree murder; instruction improper.
Whether the error was harmless	If error existed, it potentially helped Sprang by lowering the sentencing range.	The error was not harmless given the verdict and could have affected the outcome.	Not harmless beyond reasonable doubt; vacate conviction to remedy error.
Whether double jeopardy prevents retrial for second-degree murder	No retrial for second-degree murder following reversal.	Price v. Georgia allows retrial for lesser-included if reversed.	Sprang may be retried for second-degree murder.

State v. Krone, 182 Ariz. 319 (1995) (standard for guiding lesser-included offense instructions)
State v. Rodriguez, 186 Ariz. 240 (1996) (limits on when lesser-included instructions are proper)
State v. Henderson, 210 Ariz. 561 (2005) (concerning preservation and fundamental error rules)
State v. Landrigan, 176 Ariz. 1 (1993) (evidence-based standard for giving second-degree instruction)
State v. Jackson, 186 Ariz. 20 (1996) (test for when lesser-included instruction is warranted)
State v. Wall, 212 Ariz. 1 (2006) (defendant's theory may affect instruction,)
State v. Salazar, 173 Ariz. 399 (1992) (limits on instructed lesser-included offenses when defense denies involvement)
State v. Murray, 184 Ariz. 9 (1995) (premeditation assessment in lesser-included context)
Price v. Georgia, 398 U.S. 323 (1970) (retrial rights after reversal on lesser-included offense)
State v. Ellison, 213 Ariz. 116 (2006) (evidence-based evaluation of premeditation)