How has the court interpreted the felony-murder rule?

[2 Cal.App.3d 212] As to the second objection, since the jury was fully instructed both as to what constitutes robbery and as to what constitutes felony-murder, ⁵ the court was not required to instruct them on its own motion that in order to apply the felony-murder rule, appellants must have had the specific intent to commit the robbery. This is so because the jury could not have found them guilty of murder under the felony-murder doctrine without first having found them guilty of robbery. Moreover, failure to instruct the jury that in order to apply the felony-murder doctrine appellants must have had the specific intent to commit the robbery does not constitute prejudicial error where, as here, the evidence permits of no other interpretation than that appellants had the specific intent to steal. (See People v. Ford, 60 Cal.2d 772, 792--793, 36 Cal.Rptr. 620, 388 P.2d 892.)