IF A,B, and C agree to commit a robberies and one day A and B rob a bank and durning that robbery a customer is shot by A and the customer dies, can C be liable for felony murder?
under pinkerton one is liable for the substantive criminal acts of other conspirators that are in furtherance, within the scope and are foreseeable.
certainly the robbery was foreseeable, within the scope, and in furtherance...but was the homicide and thus the felony murder?
dunno why this is tripping me up, help is greatly appreciated.
3 posts • Page 1 of 1
- Posts: 940
- Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2009 12:43 pm
I think you could certainly argue that C is liable. Violence is foreseeable and within the scope of an armed robbery. I think there may be a split in courts on whether the Pinkerton Doctrine applies to felony murder, but I know in its broadest form that it does. Additionally, you may be able to analyze it outside of felony murder if there was a reckless mens rea in the shooting.
- Posts: 413
- Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 2:44 pm
If C actively participated in the planning state, than C is likely to be liable.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests