finding the felony murder rule constitutional because the State must still prove every element, including the element of intent in the underlying crime, to enhance the degree of murder
How later courts described this case
- finding the felony murder rule constitutional because the State must still prove every element, including the element of intent in the underlying crime, to enhance the degree of murder
- non-privileged evaluation may result whether examination by court order or pursuant to private arrangement by defendant
- “The felony-murder statute does not relieve the State of the burden of proving essential elements of first-degree murder. The elements [of willfulness, deliberation, and premeditation] alleged by defendant to be essential are not essential [to felony murder].”
- doctor who examined defendant at defendant’s request was allowed to express an opinion on the defendant’s sanity despite contention that physician-patient privilege existed
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
RAWLINGS, Justice
(concurring specially)-
Being satisfied the standard regarding self-incriminating statements made by an accused in course of a psychiatric examination regarding sanity at time of the alleged offense, as espoused in State v. Collins, 236 N.W.2d 376, 382-383 (Iowa 1975) (special concurrence), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 96 S.Ct. 3166 , 48 L.Ed.2d -, 44 L.W. 3735, was here commendably applied, I too find an affirmance is in order.
I would hold, however, courts are required to honor and apply the standard thus advocated in the Collins special concurrence. Without abdicating the position taken in Collins as to the physician-patient privilege, id. at 381-383 , I concur in the result.