People v. Fuller
86 Cal. App. 3d 618 (1978)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under California's first-degree felony-murder rule, a death that occurs during the flight from a burglary is considered to be in the perpetration of the felony, and the perpetrator can be prosecuted for first-degree murder, regardless of whether the burglary itself was inherently dangerous.
Facts:
- On a Sunday morning, a uniformed cadet police officer observed respondents rolling tires from the Fresno Dodge car lot toward their Plymouth vehicle.
- After the officer made a U-turn to investigate, the respondents got into their car and drove away at high speed.
- A chase ensued covering approximately seven miles over ten to twelve minutes, during which respondents drove recklessly and narrowly avoided several collisions.
- Respondents ran a red light at an intersection and collided with another car, killing its driver.
- A subsequent investigation revealed that respondents had forcibly entered four locked vans on the car lot and removed the spare tires.
Procedural Posture:
- Respondents were charged by information with murder and several counts of burglary in the trial court.
- Respondents filed a Penal Code section 995 motion to set aside the information.
- The trial court granted the motion, dismissing the murder charge and substituting it with a charge of vehicular manslaughter.
- The People, as appellant, appealed the trial court's dismissal of the murder charge to the Court of Appeal.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the first-degree felony-murder rule apply to an accidental death caused during a high-speed vehicular flight from a nonviolent burglary of an unattended motor vehicle?
Opinions:
Majority - Franson, Acting P. J.
Yes. The felony-murder rule applies to a death occurring during flight from a burglary. California Penal Code section 189 explicitly lists burglary as a predicate felony for first-degree murder, imposing strict liability for any killing committed 'in the perpetration of' the crime. Precedent establishes that flight from a felony is part of 'one continuous transaction' until the felon reaches a 'place of temporary safety.' Therefore, despite the court's view that applying the rule in this context is irrational because the underlying burglary was not inherently dangerous to human life, the court is bound by precedent to hold that the respondents can be prosecuted for first-degree murder.
Analysis:
This decision reaffirms the broad and strict application of California's statutory felony-murder rule, confirming that any burglary, regardless of its specific nonviolent circumstances, can serve as a predicate felony. The court's extensive criticism of the rule as 'irrational' and 'barbaric' in this context highlights a significant tension in the law, signaling to the legislature or a higher court that the doctrine may be overbroad, especially as the definition of burglary has expanded. By being forced by precedent to apply a rule it disagrees with, the court underscores the rigid nature of stare decisis and the felony-murder doctrine's potential to create criminal liability disproportionate to moral culpability.
