People v. Miller, 32 N.Y.2d 157 (1973)
A burglary based on the intent to commit assault can serve as the predicate felony for a felony-murder conviction, particularly when the assault occurs within a dwelling.
Summary
The case concerns whether a burglary predicated on the intent to commit assault can support a felony-murder conviction. Miller unlawfully entered an apartment, armed with a knife and spray can, and attacked one of the occupants, subsequently killing another who came to the victim’s aid. The Court of Appeals reversed the Appellate Division’s decision, holding that the burglary, based on the intent to assault, satisfied the requirements for felony murder. The court reasoned that the heightened risk of homicide within a dwelling during the commission of a felony justifies including such burglaries as a predicate for felony murder.
Facts
On October 25, 1970, Miller went to the apartment below his, armed with a butcher knife and a spray can. When Robert Pennell opened the door, Miller sprayed Pennell’s face and stabbed him in the arm. Miller followed Pennell into the apartment, continuing the attack. Rasul Aleem, Pennell’s roommate, attempted to help Pennell. Miller then stabbed Aleem in the chest, killing him.
Procedural History
Miller was indicted for felony murder and common-law murder of Aleem, and attempted murder of Pennell. He was convicted of felony murder for Aleem’s death, manslaughter in the second degree under the common-law murder count, and assault in the first degree for the attempted murder of Pennell. The trial judge set aside the felony-murder conviction, arguing that the prosecution failed to establish the underlying felony of burglary. The Appellate Division affirmed this decision. The People then appealed to the New York Court of Appeals.
Issue(s)
Whether a burglary, predicated upon the intent to commit an assault, can serve as the underlying felony for a felony-murder conviction.
Holding
Yes, because the Legislature recognized that individuals within their homes are at greater risk when someone enters with criminal intent, and the felony-murder statute aims to reduce accidental homicides during the commission of enumerated felonies; thus, burglary based on intent to assault falls within the statute’s purview.
Court’s Reasoning
The court reasoned that the felony-murder statute includes burglary as a predicate felony. Burglary requires knowingly entering or remaining unlawfully in a building with the intent to commit a crime therein. The evidence supported the finding that Miller unlawfully entered Pennell’s apartment with the intent to assault him, thus satisfying the elements of burglary. The court rejected extending the merger doctrine, which prevents an assault from serving as the predicate felony for felony murder when the assault is integral to the homicide. The Court emphasized that the revised Penal Law specifically lists felonies involving violence or substantial risk of physical injury as predicates for felony murder. The legislative intent was to exclude accidental fatalities during non-violent felonies, not to exclude burglaries involving the intent to commit violent crimes such as assault. The court stated, “Where, as here, the criminal act underlying the burglary is an assault with a dangerous weapon, the likelihood that the assault will culminate in a homicide is significantly increased by the situs of the assault.” The court further reasoned that victims within their homes are more likely to resist and less likely to escape, increasing the risk of homicide. Quoting the Practice Commentary, the court noted that the definition of burglary is satisfied “if the intruder’s intent, existing at the time of the unlawful entry or remaining, is to commit any crime.” The court explicitly rejected the reasoning of People v. Wilson, a California case reaching a contrary conclusion.