California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Smith, 201 Cal.Rptr. 311, 35 Cal.3d 798, 678 P.2d 886 (Cal. 1984):
In the present case the homicide was the result of child abuse of the assaultive variety. Thus, the underlying felony was unquestionably an "integral part of" and "included in fact" in the homicide within the meaning of Ireland. 5 Furthermore, we can conceive of no independent purpose for [35 Cal.3d 807] the conduct, and the People suggest none; just as in Ireland, the purpose here was the very assault that resulted in death. To apply the felony-murder rule in this situation would extend it "beyond any rational function that it is designed to serve." (People v. Washington, supra, 62 Cal.2d 777, 783, 44 Cal.Rptr. 442, 402 P.2d 130.) We reiterate that the ostensible purpose of the felony-murder rule is not to deter the underlying felony, but instead to deter negligent or accidental killings that may occur in the course of committing that felony. (Id. at p. 781, 44 Cal.Rptr. 442, 402 P.2d 130.) When a person willfully inflicts unjustifiable physical pain on a child under these circumstances, it is difficult to see how the assailant would be further deterred from killing negligently or accidentally in the course of that felony by application of the felony-murder rule.
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.