State of Missouri v. Marshall T. Burrage
465 S.W.3d 77, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 685 (2015)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under the felony murder rule, a death that occurs during the commission of a felony is a foreseeable and proximate result of that felony, even if the decedent was a co-perpetrator killed during a secondary crime (like a robbery) that occurred as part of the same continuous transaction.
Facts:
- Marshall Burrage received a call from a person whose friend (the victim) wanted to purchase marijuana.
- Burrage and his cousin agreed to sell the victim three pounds of marijuana for $1950.
- Burrage and his cousin retrieved the marijuana from Burrage's house and drove to a meeting place designated by the buyers.
- Upon arriving, Burrage's cousin moved to the back seat, and the victim entered the front passenger seat.
- Burrage noticed the victim did not have money and that another man (the victim's accomplice) was approaching the car.
- It was later revealed that the victim and his accomplices never intended to pay and had planned to rob Burrage and his cousin.
- Burrage saw the victim's accomplice reach for a bulge at his side and then saw a gun, leading to multiple shots being fired.
- The victim jumped out of the car as Burrage drove away and was later found dead from a single gunshot wound to the back, which could have been fired by either Burrage's cousin or the victim's own accomplice.
Procedural Posture:
- Marshall Burrage was tried by a jury in a Missouri trial court.
- The jury found Burrage guilty of second-degree felony murder, attempted delivery of marijuana, and armed criminal action, based on a theory of accomplice liability.
- Burrage appealed the judgment from the trial court to the Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District.
- On appeal, Burrage (the appellant) challenged the sufficiency of the evidence supporting all three convictions.
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 second-degree felony murder rule apply to a participant in an attempted drug sale when a co-perpetrator of an attempted robbery is killed during the transaction, making the death a foreseeable result of the underlying drug felony?
Opinions:
Majority - Robert G. Dowd, Jr.
Yes, the second-degree felony murder rule applies because the victim's death was a foreseeable and proximate result of the attempted drug delivery. The court's reasoning rests on the 'foreseeability-proximate cause concept of homicide responsibility.' It held that violence, robbery, and death are generally foreseeable consequences of an illegal drug transaction, as guns are commonly involved. The identity of the actual killer is irrelevant; what matters is that the defendant's felonious act 'set into motion the chain of events' that caused the death. The court rejected Burrage's argument that this was a 'robbery gone bad' rather than a 'drug deal gone bad,' finding that the attempted robbery was not an independent intervening cause but was inextricably part of 'one continuous transaction' with the drug deal. Therefore, Burrage, as an accomplice to the underlying drug felony, is criminally responsible for the resulting death.
Analysis:
This case reinforces the broad application of the felony murder doctrine in Missouri, particularly in the context of drug crimes. By holding that a co-perpetrator's death during a robbery attempt is a foreseeable result of the initial drug deal, the court makes it difficult for defendants to escape liability by parsing the events into separate crimes. The decision solidifies the principle that initiating a dangerous felony makes one responsible for any resulting deaths that are part of the same transaction, regardless of the victim's role or the identity of the shooter. This strengthens the 'foreseeability-proximate cause' standard and indicates that courts will view the sequence of events in such crimes holistically.
