it's like that every motherfukking where
Teen turns down 25-year prison offer, instead gets 65 years
- Thread starter Blitz82
- Start date
BelowTheMasonDixon
Veteran
California’s felony murder rule is a bit complex and frequently misunderstood. For case specific information regarding California’s felony murder rule, it is critical that you consult directly with a local criminal defense lawyer as each case is unique. However, consider the following information to better understand this unique area of the law.
What is the Felony Murder Rule?
California’s felony murder rule allows an individual to be convicted of murder if he or she, or his or her co-felon, kills another person while committing (or attempting to commit) an enumerated felony, regardless of whether or not the killing was an accident.
In essence, this means that if you and your buddy decide to commit a qualifying felony, and while committing that felony your buddy accidentally (or intentionally) kills someone, you can be convicted of murder. There has been a lot of debate back and forth in recent years on whether or not the felony murder rule is fair, but supporters of the rule usually claim that it both deters people from committing felonies and from putting others in life threatening situations while committing felonies.
Qualifying Felonies
The California Penal Code section 189 lists the various felonies that can be used to convict someone of first-degree murder via the felony murder rule. These felonies include, but are not limited to, the following:
- Arson,
- Rape,
- Mayhem,
- Kidnapping,
- Robbery
- Carjacking, and
- Burglary.
Examples
Felony murder can be a bit tricky to grasp, so let us look at a few hypothetical examples to help illustrate the ins and outs of this important law.
- Example #1: You decide to rob someone at gunpoint. Your victim resists and tries to take your gun from you. During the ensuing struggle the gun accidentally goes off and kills the victim you intended only to rob. Due to California’s felony murder rule, you can be charged with first-degree murder—robbery is one of the qualifying felonies listed under section 189 of the penal code and while attempting to commit that felony you accidentally killed someone.
- Example #2: You and your friend decide to rob a bank. Before entering the bank you both agree that you will not bring your guns with you. However, unbeknownst to you, you friend does bring a firearm with him and intentionally shoots and kills the bank manager when he will not cooperate. Both you and your friend can be charged with first-degree murder because you were co-felons who caused someone’s death during the commission of a qualifying felony. It makes no difference that you had agreed not to bring guns to the robbery.
What are you talking about?
He was involved in the shootout. That nikka was busting his gun as well.
Shang Tsung
All Star
This is actually a good law and isn't meant to only protect pigs
If someone breaks into my home, I dont want to be charged if i end up killing them. Instead charge their dumbass friends or people helping them
This dumbass can rot in a cell for all i care. no sympathy for thieves
If someone breaks into my home, I dont want to be charged if i end up killing them. Instead charge their dumbass friends or people helping them
This dumbass can rot in a cell for all i care. no sympathy for thieves
BelowTheMasonDixon
Veteran
What are you talking about?
He was involved in the shootout. That nikka was busting his gun as well.
He shot after being shot at. Breh. And on top of that I already showed you the California Felony Murder doctrine. IF you wanna go do some stupid shyt with your homies, lets see how it works out for you
I promise you gonna be all "But But I thought Cali didn't have that law."
TRAP AMERICAN TV
TRAP GOLD
This is actually a good law and isn't meant to only protect pigs
If someone breaks into my home, I dont want to be charged if i end up killing them. Instead charge their dumbass friends or people helping them
This dumbass can rot in a cell for all i care. no sympathy for thieves
I cosign this.
Diddly Drogba
Superstar
why did he shoot at the cops it was just a BE charge and they was all teenagers they would have did 9-12 months in juvie and been home. 
This is actually a good law and isn't meant to only protect pigs
If someone breaks into my home, I dont want to be charged if i end up killing them. Instead charge their dumbass friends or people helping them
This dumbass can rot in a cell for all i care. no sympathy for thieves
Why does anyone have to be charged in that scenario?
The robbers should be charged with something just for the psychological burden placed on the homeowner for having to execute another human being for safety reasons.Why does anyone have to be charged in that scenario?
That's not what I'm tripping about. Obviously you didn't read my post. I'm asking how does he get charged with murder. I don't have "fake outrage" over him getting locked up. I don't understand how he's guilty of a murder he didn't commit. Your fake outrage is ridiculous. One dude pulls a gun and gets killed but everybody involved gets a murder charge? How does that make sense?iF THE HOME OWNER WOULD HAVE KILLED HIM IT WOULD BE THE SAME CHARGE. INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER.
nikkaS ON THIS FORUM FAKE OUTRAGED THAT A 19 YEAR OLD MAN GOT CONVICTED.
The logic is, and I'm not saying I agree 100%, that they facilitated in a situation in which the murder was inevitable or necessary by virtue of committing home invasions.
Or the robbers could, you know, be charged with robbery.
