Under the common law, the felony murder rule states that if a death occurs while a person is committing or attempting to commit any felony, the person could be convicted of felony murder, even if the death was accidental or unintentional.

Under the common law, the felony murder rule states that if a death occurs while a person is committing or attempting to commit any felony, the person could be convicted of felony murder, even if the death was accidental or unintentional.

Today many states have limited the felony murder rule by requiring the felony to be a dangerous crime.

Blake Layman, now 18, Levi Sparks and Anthony Sharp, both now 20, and Jose Quiroz, now 19, became known as the “Elkhart Four” when they were charged in 2012 with felony murder after they broke into a home in Elkhart, Indiana, and the homeowner shot and killed their accomplice, 21-year-old Danzele Johnson.

Indiana and at least 42 other states have felony murder laws on the books, which in the case of the “Elkhart Four” meant that prosecutors held the four men responsible for Johnson’s death during the commission of the crime even though none of them had pulled the trigger.

After reading Chapter 10 in the textbook (specifically Pages 283 – 286 regarding felony murder), reviewing the PowerPoint lecture, and watching the attached video on the “Elkhart Four,” please respond to this post:

In the “Elkhart Four” case, do you think felony murder is the proper charge for the defendants?

Should they all be held responsible for their accomplice’s death during the commission of a felony (burglary) even though none of them pulled the trigger?

Do you think the death of their accomplice at the hands of an armed homeowner was the natural and probable consequence of burglarizing a home?

Under the common law, the felony murder rule states that if a death occurs while a person is committing or attempting to commit any felony, the person could be convicted of felony murder, even if the death was accidental or unintentional.