“The absence of a lesser included offense instruction increases the risk that the jury will convict, not because it is persuaded that the defendant is guilty of [the greater offense], but simply to avoid setting the defendant free.”
How later courts described this case
- “The absence of a lesser included offense instruction increases the risk that the jury will convict, not because it is persuaded that the defendant is guilty of [the greater offense], but simply to avoid setting the defendant free.”
- “It has long been the rule in this jurisdiction that jury-demandable and non-jury-demandable counts joined in a single indictment may be tried concurrently by the jury and judge.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
On consideration of appellee’s petition for rehearing en banc, and the response thereto; and it appearing that the majority of the judges of this court has voted to grant appellee’s petition for rehearing en banc, it is
ORDERED that appellee’s petition for rehearing en banc is granted. The opinion of the division, published at 745 A.2d 949 (D.C.2000), is vacated as to parts II and III, and the judgments of conviction are affirmed for the reasons stated in part I of the division’s opinion and in the en banc opinion of the court issued this date.