Is there any case law where a defendant has argued that the underlying felonies, such as burglary and robbery, had ended before the victim was killed?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Frandsen, 245 Cal.Rptr.3d 658, 33 Cal.App.5th 1126 (Cal. App. 2019):
People v. Cavitt (2004) 33 Cal.4th 187, 207, 14 Cal.Rptr.3d 281, 91 P.3d 222 ( Cavitt ), is instructive. There, the defendants similarly argued the underlying feloniesburglary and robberyhad ended before the victim was killed, relieving them of
[245 Cal.Rptr.3d 676]
liability for felony murder. ( Id. at p. 206, 14 Cal.Rptr.3d 281, 91 P.3d 222.) The court rejected this argument, holding that felony murder applies when the killing and the felony are part of one continuous transaction, including a defendants flight after the felony to a place of temporary safety. ( Id. at p. 207, 14 Cal.Rptr.3d 281, 91 P.3d 222 ; see also People v. Ainsworth (1988) 45 Cal.3d 984, 10151016, 248 Cal.Rptr. 568, 755 P.2d 1017.)
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
