Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Burkhart

Montana Supreme Court

Decided December 23, 2004No. 03-108Published

1DissentJustice Leaphart

¶66 Because I believe that the felony-murder statute under which the Appellant was charged is fundamentally defective under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, I dissent.

¶67 Although the Court recites the history of the felony-murder rule,1 with special reference to the various limitations which courts have imposed upon it in an effort to mitigate some of the more illogical and legally troubling results of its application,2 the opinion does not, to my mind, properly confront the rationale behind the limitation which the Appellant cites. The…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Sandstrom v. MontanaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. Morissette v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
  3. United States v. United States Gypsum Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
  4. People v. DillonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1983
  5. People v. AaronMichigan Supreme Court · 1980

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API