Whether the state trial court erred when it failed to instruct the jury on a lesser included offense when the evidence in the case supports an inference that the lesser-included offense was committed?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED This Court's precedent in united States v. Dixon, 509 ‘U.S. 688 (1993), reached the gquestien of whether a criminal defendant is entitled to a lesser-included offense instruction when, (1] all elements of the lesser ° included offense are included with the offense charged, and [2] there is a sufficiemt evidentiary basis for the lesser charge. 1. At trial, Mr. Ewalan requested the jury be instructed on the lesser-included offense of unlawful display of a weapon. Following this request, the state trial court reversed, stating it “wrestled with the issue “all night," but ultimately declined to instruct the jury : on the lesser-included offense of assault in the first . degree. The question is whether the state trial court erced when it failed to instruct the jucy ‘on a lesser included offense when the evidence in the case supports an inferrence that the lesser-included offense was committed? eo co \