*344ark*issue8*NOTE TO PRINTER: PRINT THIS CONCURRING OPINION SEPARATELY AFTER ALL OTHER OPINIONS DELIVERED TODAY. FOR HARDBOUND PURPOSES, THE CONCURRING OPINION SHOULD BE PAGINATED 344 ARK. 231-A, AT THE END OF HILL V. STATE, 344 ARK. 216 (MARCH 22, 2001); PLEASE CHANGE THE PAGE DESIGNATION FOR THE TOP OF CURRENT PAGE 232 TO 231-A AND ADD THE CONCURRING OPINION BY GLAZE, J. IT WILL BE NECESSARY TO CREATE A NEW PAGE 232 FOR THE BEGINNING OF LUEBBERS V. MONEY STORE, INC., NOW LOCATED MID-PAGE AT 344 ARK. 232.

26 April 2001

SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS

No. CR00-921

RICHARD HILL, JR., APPELLANT, V. STATE OF ARKANSAS, APPELLEE.

CONCURRING OPINION ON DENIAL OF PETITION FOR REHEARING

Tom Glaze, Justice, concurring. I would deny the petition for rehearing but not on the basis that there was no evidence to support the giving of an instruction on felony manslaughter as a lesser included offense. Based on the evidence, it cannot be said the appellant Richard Hill's shooting and killing the victim, Kenneth Oglesby, was done negligently.