finding trial court erred in quashing attempted murder charge sua sponte
How later courts described this case
- finding trial court erred in quashing attempted murder charge sua sponte
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
LARSEN, Justice,
dissenting.
The majority holds that the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury that the Commonwealth must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the act causing the death was done “in furtherance of the design to commit the felony.” In my opinion, the trial court was correct in refusing that requested instruction.
Murder of the second degree, “felony-murder”, is defined by 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 2502(b) as a homicide “committed while defendant was engaged as a principal or an accomplice in the perpetration of a felony (emphasis supplied).” Nowhere in this statute are the words “in furtherance of the design to commit the felony”, and the majority is legislating in en-grafting this requirement into the plain meaning of the statutory language.
Consequently, I would affirm the judgment of sentence at No. 392.