⚡ 10-Second Rule
If someone dies while you commit a dangerous felony, the law can call that death murder.
🧒 ELI-10 Scene
Three kids sneak into the school's chemistry lab at night to steal the answer key. Nobody plans any damage. But Wes, keeping lookout, knocks a burner into some papers, and fire wrecks half the room. Principal Hayes expels all three — even the two who never touched the burner. Why? Sneaking into a lab at night is dangerous all by itself. Choosing that dangerous plan means owning whatever disaster grows out of it. But Principal Hayes has limits. If a passing firefighter had broken a window, the kids wouldn't own the window. They own their team's damage, during their scheme, flowing from it.
⚖️ Actual Rule
Under the common-law felony-murder rule, a killing — even an accidental one — committed during the commission or attempted commission of a dangerous felony is murder; the intent to commit the felony supplies the malice. The doctrine carries built-in limits. (1) The felony must be inherently dangerous; statutes typically enumerate burglary, arson, rape, robbery, and kidnapping as predicates for first-degree felony murder. (2) Under the merger (independent-felony) rule, the predicate must be independent of the killing itself — felonies like aggravated assault, defined by injury to the victim, merge and cannot support the charge. (3) The death must fall within the res gestae: it must occur during the felony or the immediate flight from it, ending when the felon reaches a place of temporary safety, and it must be in furtherance of the felony. (4) The death must be a foreseeable result of the felony. (5) Under the majority agency theory, the defendant is liable only for killings committed by a co-felon; under the minority proximate-cause theory, liability extends to any death the felony proximately causes, including one inflicted by a police officer or victim. (6) Under the widely followed Redline view, there is no felony-murder liability when the person killed is a co-felon justifiably shot by police or the victim. Commonwealth v. Redline, 137 A.2d 472 (Pa. 1958). The Model Penal Code rejects a freestanding rule but creates a rebuttable presumption of the extreme recklessness needed for murder when the killing occurs during robbery, rape, arson, burglary, kidnapping, or felonious escape (MPC § 210.2(1)(b), paraphrased).
[NJ-VARIANT: flagged for future Eli Explains NJ Law module]
ELI-10 translation: pick a dangerous crime and you own your team's foreseeable deaths, from start until safe escape.
🔍 Ask These Questions
- Was the defendant committing or attempting an inherently dangerous felony? (Was the crime itself scary-dangerous, like robbery or arson?)
- Is the felony independent of the killing? (Is it a separate wrong, not just the deadly attack wearing a felony name?)
- Did the death occur within the res gestae — during the felony or immediate flight? (Did it happen before the robber reached a safe hideout?)
- Was the death in furtherance and foreseeable? (Did it help or predictably flow from the crime, not come out of nowhere?)
- Who killed — apply agency or proximate cause? (Under the majority rule, only deaths caused by the robber's own team count.)
- Was the person killed a co-felon justifiably killed? (If police lawfully shoot one robber, the partners aren't murderers under the Redline view.)
⚠️ Bar Trap
Exam language: Examiners have a police officer or resisting victim fire the fatal shot and bait you into imposing felony-murder liability on the surviving felon; under the majority agency theory, killings by non-felons do not qualify. The mirror-image trap is merger: an aggravated assault that kills cannot serve as its own predicate felony, or every fatal beating would automatically become murder.
ELI-10: Ask who pulled the trigger. If it wasn't someone on the criminal's team, the majority rule says no felony murder. And the attack that caused the death can't double as the dangerous crime.
🧪 Question
Two men, armed with pistols, entered a pawnshop shortly before closing and ordered the owner to empty the register. As the first man scooped cash into a duffel bag, the owner drew a revolver from beneath the counter and fired, killing the first man instantly. The second man fled empty-handed and was arrested two blocks away. He is charged with felony murder for the death of his accomplice. The jurisdiction follows the majority approach to felony-murder liability.
Should the second man be convicted?
(A) Yes, because the death occurred during the commission of an armed robbery. (B) Yes, because armed robbers can foresee that a victim may respond with deadly force. (C) No, because the fatal shot was fired by the shop owner rather than by a participant in the felony. (D) No, because the robbery had terminated once the second man abandoned the cash and fled.
Answer: (C). Under the majority agency theory, felony murder reaches only killings committed by the defendant or a co-felon acting as his agent. The owner's justified shot — killing a co-felon, the classic Redline scenario — cannot be attributed to the surviving robber.
💡 Why the Wrong Answers Are Wrong
- (A) applies only the res gestae timing element and ignores the agency limit on who must do the killing.
- (B) states the minority proximate-cause theory; foreseeability cannot substitute for agency in a majority-rule jurisdiction.
- (D) reaches the right result on a false ground: flight had barely begun, so the res gestae was still running — agency, not termination, defeats liability.
- ELI-10: The misconception is thinking any death during a robbery is automatically the robber's murder. The majority rule counts only the crime team's own killings.
