Court Opinion

ID: 9702903
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 23:31:04.546469+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:21:43.254126
License: Public Domain

*664Dissenting Opinion by
Me. Justice Cohen:
Defendant requested a charge to the effect that if the intention to commit a robbery were formed and the actual robbery was indulged' in after the fatal assault •had been committed, then the killing was not raised to murder in the first degree by the Felony Murder Statute. I think the defendant was entitled to such a charge and I do not think that Commonwealth v. Stelma, 327 Pa. 317, 192 Atl. 906 (1937), is adverse authority.
As Chief Justice Jones said in Commonwealth v. Redline, 391 Pa. 486, 137 A. 2d 472 (1958) : “In adjudging a felony-murder, it is to be remembered at all times that the thing which is imputed to a felon for a killing incidental to his felony is malice. ... ‘It is necessary ... to show that the conduct causing death was done in furtherance of the design to commit the felony. . . .’ ” Thus, a charge which would require the jury to find the presence of malice at the time of the killing necessary to raise the killing to murder in thé first degree should have been afforded the defendant.