People v. Bowen, Docket No. 2593
| Decision Date | 24 July 1968 |
| Docket Number | No. 3,Docket No. 2593,3 |
| Parties | PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Roy BOWEN, Defendant-Appellant |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US |
James L. Colman, Watervliet, for appellant.
Frank J. Kelley, Atty. Gen., Robert A. Derengoski, Sol. Gen., Lansing, John T. Hammond, Pros. Atty., Cass County, St. Joseph, for appellee.
Before FITZGERALD, P.J., and GILLIS and McGREGOR, JJ.
The 'felony-murder' rule in Michigan is found at C.L.1948, § 750.316 (Stat.Ann.1954 § 28.548). It reads as follows:
'All murder which shall be perpetrated by means of poison, or lying in wait, or any other kind of wilful, deliberate and premeditated killing, or Which shall be committed in the prepetration, or attempt to perpetrate any arson, rape, robbery or burglary, shall be murder of the first degree, and shall be punished by solitary confinement at hard labor in the state prison for life.' (Emphasis supplied.)
The rule supports a conviction of first degree murder against an accomplice of the murderer, if the accomplice entered into the felony with the contemplation, actual or implied, that resistance from citizens or police officers could be expected. See People v. Podolski (1952), 332 Mich. 508, 52 N.W.2d 201.*
Defendant was convicted of first degree murder by a patent application of the felony-murder rule to him as an accomplice as the result of the fatal shooting of a police officer by his partner when the 2 men were attempting to escape from a bank in Benton Harbor where they had just committed a robbery. The murder took place inside the bank. However, defendant urges this Court to accept the claimed fact that the felons had discussed the matter of shooting while planning to rob the bank and that they had agreed not to injure anyone, thus negating any intent on the part of the defendant to participate in bloodshed. The theory advanced is that the act of the murder was separate and independent of any action by the defendant. It is also alleged that the statute does not apply to defendant for the robbery was not being perpetrated, being fully 'consummated' prior to any shooting. We are not concerned here with defendant's plea of lack of intent to murder. If he intends to commit a robbery, and clearly contemplates a violent reaction by him to any resistance by a victim, then the rule will apply to him if a murder occurs at the hands of his accomplice. See People v. Podolski, supra; People v. Utter (1921), 217 Mich. 75, 185 N.W. 830; 12 A.L.R.2d 210. The exact contemplations of this defendant are best shown by the testimony of witnesses in the bank who...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Gillis
...that he had reached a point of temporary safety at this point. [Id. at 523, 234 N.W.2d 679.] See, also, People v. Bowen, 12 Mich. App. 438, 440-441, 162 N.W.2d 911 (1968) (relying on the dictionary definition of "perpetrate" as "`[t]o carry through'" to conclude that a homicide committed wh......
-
People v. Goree
...all the codefendants are guilty of first-degree murder. People v. Austin (1963), 370 Mich. 12, 120 N.W.2d 766; People v. Bowen (1968), 12 Mich.App. 438, 162 N.W.2d 911. Bearing on whether the robbery was still being 'perpetrated' when officer Vonk was shot is the question of whether defenda......
-
People v. Grimmett
...the principal during the course of the felony. We concur with the views expressed by another panel of our Court in People v. Bowen (1968), 12 Mich.App. 438, 162 N.W.2d 911, where the identical argument failed to persuade the Court that it should change existing policy. See People v. Podolsk......
-
People v. Smith
...is felony murder. (Emphasis supplied.) People v. Podolski, 332 Mich. 508, 518, 52 N.W.2d 201, 205 (1952); see People v. Bowen, 12 Mich.App. 438, 162 N.W.2d 911 (1968); People v. Goree, 30 Mich.App. 490, 186 N.W.2d 872 (1971). Likewise the New York Court of Appeals said that in order for a k......