Opinion ID: 1693796
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Felony Murder Instructions

Text: As recognized by the majority, defendant was convicted of felony murder as either a principal or an aider and abettor. Op. at 136. To convict defendant of felony murder, the prosecution was required to establish: (1) the killing of a human being, (2) with the intent to kill, to do great bodily harm, or to create a very high risk of death or great bodily harm with knowledge that death or great bodily harm was the probable result, (3) while committing, attempting to commit, or assisting in the commission of any of the felonies enumerated in M.C.L. § 750.316; M.S.A. § 28.548.[ [5] ] [ People v. Nix, 453 Mich. 619, 640, 556 N.W.2d 866 (1996)(Boyle, J., dissenting).] After the trial court appropriately instructed the jury on the first element of felony murder, [6] it then stated: The prosecution does not have to prove that [defendant], himself, killed [the victim] or participated in the killing. To prove this element the prosecution need prove only that one of the robbers killed [the victim]. By instructing the jury that the prosecution was required to prove only that one of the robbers killed the victim, the trial court blended its felony-murder instruction with an element of aiding and abetting. As noted by the majority, the elements supporting a finding of aiding and abetting felony murder are: (1) [felony murder] was committed by the defendant or some other person, (2) the defendant performed acts or gave encouragement that assisted the commission of [felony murder], and (3) the defendant intended the commission of [felony murder] or had knowledge that the principal intended its commission at the time he gave aid and encouragement. [Op. at 135, quoting People v. Turner, 213 Mich.App. 558, 568, 540 N.W.2d 728 (1995).] By instructing the jury that the victim had to be killed by defendant or another person, the trial court satisfied the first element of aiding and abetting felony murder. The trial court also satisfied the third element by instructing the jury that defendant had to possess the requisite mens rea to commit felony murder. However, the court failed to properly instruct the jury on the second element of aiding and abetting felony murder by instructing the jury that the defendant performed acts or gave encouragement that assisted the commission of [felony murder]. [7] Turner, supra at 568, 540 N.W.2d 728. [8] The majority accurately recognizes that the trial court failed to properly instruct the jury that defendant must have performed acts or given encouragement that assisted the commission of [felony murder], the second element of aiding and abetting felony murder. Op. at 142. It also notes that, to be guilty as an aider and abettor, a defendant must perform acts or give encouragement that assists the commission of the crime. The majority concedes that defendant established the existence of an error regarding an essential element of aiding and abetting. However, unfortunately, it concludes that the error did not prejudice him. Id. Without providing any supporting rationale, the majority conclusively states that the jury would not have convicted defendant without concluding that he performed acts or gave encouragement that assisted the commission of the crime. Op. at 142. It reasons that, when viewed as a whole, the trial court's instructions adequately protected defendant's rights. Id., at 142. However, the majority attempts to support this erroneous reasoning by citing the following excerpts from the trial court's instructions: If the killing was purely accidental and totally unexpected, none of the robbers is guilty of First Degree Murder, or if the killing was an act done by one of the robbers which the others had no reason to anticipate, the other robbers are not guilty of First Degree Felony Murder. They are guilty of an armed robbery, but not murder.