Court Opinion

ID: 9689041
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 18:17:09.640744+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:43.623854
License: Public Domain

T. M. Burns, J.
(concurring in part and dissenting in part). I cannot agree with the majority opinion insofar as it would affirm the defendant’s felony-murder conviction. The Supreme Court opinion in People v Aaron, 409 Mich 672; 299 NW2d 304 (1980), as I read it, does not preclude us from following a substantial body of case law approving of the 1976 opinion of this Court in *382People v Fountain, 71 Mich App 491; 248 NW2d 589 (1976).
I have always been persuaded that the reasoning of Fountain was correct and that that of People v Till, 80 Mich App 16; 263 NW2d 586 (1977), was incorrect. Therefore, because the Supreme Court opinion in Aaron is not applicable to this case, I would rely generally on the status of Michigan law as it stood on the date of Aaron and specifically on the opinion of this Court in Fountain. I would not hesitate to apply Fountain here.
I concur in the affirming of defendant’s conviction of breaking and entering an occupied dwelling with intent to commit larceny, but I dissent and would reverse defendant’s first-degree felony-murder conviction.