# Easter v. State

> Supreme Court of Arkansas · October 7, 1991 · 306 Ark. 615

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9667132

## Case

- **Full name:** Curtis Bernard EASTER v. STATE of Arkansas
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Arkansas
- **Decided:** October 7, 1991
- **Citations:** 306 Ark. 615; 816 S.W.2d 602; 1991 Ark. LEXIS 467
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Brown
- **Judges:** Newbern, Brown
- **Cited by:** 19 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9667132

## Opinion text

Robert L. Brown, Justice, concurring. I agree with the majority opinion on all points except its reasoning on the trial court’s refusal to give an instruction on manslaughter as a lesser included offense. This case, factually, does not lend itself to a manslaughter instruction in my opinion, because there was not sufficient evidence in the record to support it. For that reason the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the instruction.
The majority, however, bases affirmance in point four on the “skip rule.” The rationale for the skip rule, as explained by the majority, troubles me. What the majority is saying is if a jury convicts a defendant of an offense two grades more serious than the lesser offense, this “cures” the failure to give an instruction on that lesser offense. Such reasoning fails to consider the effect that an instruction on the lesser offense, not to mention defense counsel’s closing argument, could have on a jury and its verdict. The skip rule suggests after-the-fact rationalization and for that reason is a concept this court needs to examine more closely when the circumstances warrant it.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9667132. Public record. Not legal advice.