Boyle v. Certainteed Corp‪.‬

A jury convicted defendant of first degree murder based primarily on her videotaped interview with the police, during which she admitted that she ripped money from the pocket of the victim while her companion was strangling him to death. On appeal, defendant contends that her statement should been excluded because it was involuntary and taken in violation of Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436 (Miranda). In addition, defendant contends that the trial court erred in failing to instruct sua sponte on lesser included offenses of murder and on theft. Although we affirm the trial courts admission of the videotape of the interview, we agree with defendant that the trial court had a sua sponte duty to instruct on lesser included offenses of murder. Because we find the trial courts failure to give such instructions to have been prejudicial, we reverse the conviction and remand for a new trial.