The State, Respondent v. Amos Lamont Mattison, Petitioner

Summary

The court affirmed Mattison’s convictions, while modifying the lower appellate court’s characterization of the omitted prior-knowledge instruction as merely implicit. Although the jury instructions were confusing and omitted express instructions on mere association and mere knowledge, the charge as a whole adequately conveyed that accomplice liability required intent, participation through an overt act, and the requisite connection to the common design. The court held that the refusal to give the requested instructions therefore was not reversible error.