NOTICE TO COUNSEL AND JUDGES: As provided in the Court's Order accepting the proposed jury instructions for a period of working review, the Court's provisional approval "is for the purpose of refining and testing the application and accuracy of the pattern instructions and does not ensure error-free trials, and their use does not carry a no-reversal guarantee. It is not intended that this provisional acceptance is a final approval of the content of any instruction and each judge may use or refuse any instruction as he or she sees fit[,]" according to law. (emphasis added).
1. State ex rel. Combes v. Bowles, 151 W.Va.
194, 151 S.E. 2d; State v. Lewis, 133 W.Va. 584, 57 S.E. 2d 513 (1949).
Malice may be either express or implied or inferred. See also State v. Sanders,
108 W.Va. 148, 150 S.E. 519 (1929); State v. Roush, 95 W.Va. 132, 120
S.E. 304 (1923).
2. State v. Young, 50 W.Va. 96, 40 S.E. 334 (1901).
Malice is not confined to ill-will toward any one person but may be directed
generally. Malice is that "malevolence which comes from a depraved heart,
regardless of social duty and fatally bent on mischief". State v. Young,
Supra. page 98 quoting State v. Douglas, 28 W.Va. 297, 300 (1886).
3. State v. Starkey, 161 W.Va. 517, 523-524,
244 S.E. 2d 219, 223-224 (1978) citing State v. Douglas, Supra.
299, "...malice is not only confined to a particular ill will to the deceased,
but is intended to denote...an action flowing from a wicked and corrupt motive..."
See also State v. Panetta, 85 W.Va. 212, 101 S.E. 360 (1919); State
v. Wilson, 95 W.Va. 525, 121 S.E. 726 (1924); Waller v. Comm., 134
Va. 773, 114 S.E. 786 (1922).