The History of Felony Murder: An Archaic and Unjust Law
By Truth Behind the Bars
The felony murder rule is one of the most controversial doctrines in American criminal law. It dates back to English common law of the 1500s–1600s, when society believed that anyone involved in a crime should be punished for every consequence, even unintended ones. Back then, the law was brutally simple: “If death results from a felony, all are guilty of murder.”
But centuries later, this idea is outdated, unfair, and dangerous. Modern justice systems around the world have abolished or limited felony murder because it punishes people not for their actions, but for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Why It’s Unfair
The felony murder rule means that a person can be sentenced to life in prison EVEN DEATH! for a killing they neither committed nor intended.
You don’t have to pull the trigger.
You don’t have to know it’s going to happen.
In some cases, you don’t even have to be physically present.
It replaces the constitutional principle of individual culpability with a blanket of guilt.
How States Handle Felony Murder Today
Felony murder is not applied uniformly. Some states have recognized its unfairness and restricted or abolished it.
Abolished: Hawaii, Kentucky, Michigan, and Massachusetts have done away with it.
Restricted: States like California (Senate Bill 1437, 2019) limit it to major participants who acted with reckless indifference to human life.
Broad Use (like Florida): Still apply it harshly, even to non-shooters, getaway drivers, or people who had left the scene.
This patchwork proves its weakness: if justice depends on what state you’re in, then justice isn’t justice at all.
What Triggers Felony Murder?
A person can face felony murder for:
Being present - during a felony where a death occurs (robbery, burglary, arson, drug deal).
Being an accomplice - even if unarmed and passive.
Providing minor aid - like lending a car (Ryan Holle) or acting as lookout.
Not even being there - simply planning or associating with people who commit the felony.
Deaths caused by third parties - even if a police officer or a victim causes the death.
Why It’s Unconstitutional in Spirit
Eighth Amendment → Disproportionate punishment (life without parole for someone who never killed).
Due Process (14th Amendment) → No fair assessment of individual culpability.
Universal Human Rights → Global trend is to abolish collective punishment.
Independent Act Doctrine
Florida law recognizes the Independent Act Doctrine: if one participant in a felony commits an act outside the scope of the original plan, it is an independent act that breaks the chain of liability.
Example: If the robbery has ended and a co-felon commits a new, separate crime, others cannot be held responsible.
In Victor’s case, once the store owner pursued and escalated the situation, the chain of causation legally broke. Yet the felony murder charge ignored this doctrine.
Felony Murder Status by State (2025 Overview)
The Absurdity of Felony Murder: Sentenced for Killings They Didn’t Commit
Ryan Holle (Florida, 2003)
Ryan lent his roommate his car in 2003, knowing his friends were going to burglarize a house.
He stayed home, never went to the scene, never held a weapon, never saw the victim.
During the burglary, someone else killed the homeowner.
Ryan was convicted of first-degree felony murder and sentenced to life without parole.
His case shows the extreme injustice: punished as a murderer for not stopping a crime he wasn’t present at.
Citation: Holle v. State, 159 So.3d 402 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015).
Victor Salastier Diaz Estevez (Florida, 2007)
Victor was not the shooter, and in his first trial (2007) the jury signaled his lower culpability.
The event that led to death wasn’t even part of the robbery: the store owner chased after the suspects, armed, while on the phone with 911.
Under Florida’s Independent Act Doctrine, once a felony has ended and a third party (like a store owner) starts a new, independent chain of events, any resulting death cannot be pinned on the original suspects.
Despite this, prosecutors relitigated him through multiple trials until they secured a felony murder conviction — ignoring the fact that legally, the killing had broken away from the original event.
Citation: Diaz Estevez v. State, Case Nos. 4D10-1865 & 4D11-1367 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011).
Emmanuel Mendoza (California, 1997)
Emmanuel Mendoza helped lure a robbery victim to a meeting place where another man carried a gun.
He did not fire the weapon, did not plan the killing, and did not intend for anyone to die.
During the robbery, the armed accomplice shot and killed the victim.
Mendoza was convicted of felony murder with “special circumstances.”
He was sentenced to life without parole.
Citation: People v. Mendoza, 18 Cal.4th 1114 (Cal. Sup. Ct. 1998).
Derek Lee (Pennsylvania, 2014)
Derek Lee participated in a robbery where his co-defendant shot and killed someone.
Lee was not the shooter and did not fire a weapon.
Pennsylvania law mandates life without parole for second-degree murder (felony murder).
Lee was automatically sentenced to LWOP — no discretion given.
His case is now part of a constitutional challenge in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
Citation: Commonwealth v. Derek Lee, No. 14 WAP 2023 (Pa. Supreme Court, pending 2024).
Lakeith Smith (Alabama, 2015)
At age 15, Lakeith Smith was involved in a series of burglaries with friends.
During one of the burglaries, police shot and killed one of his co-defendants.
Although Smith never fired a shot, he was charged with felony murder for his friend’s death.
In 2018, he was sentenced to 55 years in prison (30 years for felony murder, plus burglary sentences).
His case drew national attention as an example of how the felony murder rule can punish teenagers harshly when police are the ones who pull the trigger.
Citation: State v. Smith, Montgomery County Circuit Court, Alabama (2018).
Conclusion
The felony murder rule is a legal relic — rooted in centuries-old common law, but incompatible with modern justice. It punishes people not for what they did, but for what others did.
Cases like Ryan Holle’s and Victor’s show how devastating and illogical this rule is. In a country that claims to value fairness and proportional justice, felony murder remains one of the most archaic, unlawful, and unjust doctrines still on the books.
It’s time for reform — because being in the wrong place at the wrong time should not equal life in prison.
Federal Constitutional Protections That Undermine the Felony Murder Doctrine
The felony murder rule collides with fundamental constitutional principles. U.S. Supreme Court precedent and federal statutes provide strong grounds to challenge its fairness, proportionality, and legality.
1. Fifth Amendment – Double Jeopardy & Due Process
Double Jeopardy Clause: Prevents relitigation of facts already decided (Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436 (1970)).
Due Process Clause: Requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt of individual culpability, not guilt by association.
Relevance: Felony murder often convicts defendants of murder despite acquittals or without proof they killed or intended to kill.
2. Sixth Amendment – Right to a Jury Trial & Counsel
*Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000)**: Any fact that increases punishment must be found by a jury.
Relevance: Felony murder statutes impose life or death sentences without a jury finding intent to kill, violating the Sixth Amendment.
3. Eighth Amendment – Cruel and Unusual Punishment
SCOTUS has struck down extreme sentences for juveniles and non-killers:
*Enmund v. Florida (1982)**: Death penalty unconstitutional for a non-shooter getaway driver.
*Tison v. Arizona (1987)**: Only “major participants” acting with reckless indifference may face capital punishment.
*Miller v. Alabama (2012)**: Mandatory LWOP for juveniles unconstitutional.
Relevance: Life without parole for non-shooters, minors, or minimal participants is disproportionate and violates evolving standards of decency.
4. Fourteenth Amendment – Due Process & Equal Protection
Due Process: Felony murder violates substantive due process principles because it punishes without proof of mens rea (intent).
Equal Protection: States treat felony murder differently (some abolished it, others mandate LWOP), creating disparate outcomes between states — some allow life for minor involvement, others don’t even have felony murder. Producing arbitrary, unequal outcomes.
5. Federal Statutory Hooks
28 U.S.C. § 2254 – Federal Habeas Corpus: Permits state prisoners to challenge convictions in federal court when constitutional rights are violated.
42 U.S.C. § 1983 – Civil Rights Actions: Enables lawsuits against state actors who violate constitutional rights during felony murder prosecutions.
International Treaties / Human Rights (as persuasive authority): ICCPR (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) — U.S. is a party, and it prohibits disproportionate punishment. Not binding in habeas, but persuasive in reform advocacy.
Federal Case Law Anchors
Ashe v. Swenson (1970) → Collateral estoppel is part of the Fifth Amendment; facts once decided can’t be re-litigated.
Enmund v. Florida (1982) → No death penalty for minor participant/non-killer.
Tison v. Arizona (1987) → Set “major participant + reckless indifference” threshold.
Kennedy v. Louisiana (2008) → Proportionality principle; death can’t be imposed where victim wasn’t killed.
Miller v. Alabama (2012) → Juveniles can’t face mandatory LWOP, even for felony murder.
Graham v. Florida (2010) → LWOP unconstitutional for juveniles in non-homicide cases; shows proportionality standards.
Conclusion:
The felony murder rule is out of step with constitutional protections designed to ensure fairness, proportionality, and individualized justice. These federal safeguards form the backbone of challenges against convictions that punish people for killings they did not commit.
