killing the officer and thus, the State argues, no rational basis existed to instruct the jury on manslaughter. We need not resolve the question of whether the trial court erred in refusing to give a manslaughter instruction, however, because of the nature of the jury verdict. Here, only Pearson’s mental state was disputed at trial. The jury had the opportunity to convict Pearson of either aggravated murder, which requires knowing or intentional killing, or simple murder, which in the case of killing a peace officer requires only recklessness. Because the jury chose to convict for aggravated murder, the court’s refusal to give an instruction on manslaughter, an offense requiring recklessness, constituted at most harmless error. See State v. Gotschall, 782 P.2d 459, 464 (Utah 1989) (<HOLDING>). But see State v. Oldroyd, 685 P.2d 551,
holding that there was no error where one instruction did not inform the jury that in order to convict defendant of attempted murder the evidence must show that defendant had a specific intent to commit murder but where subsequent instruction did inform jury of this requirement and concluding that the instructions when read as a whole adequately informed the jury of the requirement of specific intent to kill holding that where jury had opportunity to convict defendant of manslaughter but convicted of greater offense of second degree murder refusing to give instruction on negligent homicide was if error harmless holding that the trial courts erroneous instruction on the nonexistent included offense of attempted reckless manslaughter was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt where the jury reached a unanimous guilty verdict as to the charged offense of attempted murder in the second degree holding that the defendant who was charged with felony murder was not entitled to a lesser included instruction on manslaughter because manslaughter is neither a lesser included offense nor an inferior degree crime with respect to felony murder holding that trial court should instruct the jury that if they had any reasonable doubt as to whether unlawful killing was murder or manslaughter it was jurys duty to convict defendant of the lesser offense manslaughter