Also known as: depraved-mind murder · depraved heart murder · depraved-heart murder
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
A form of common law murder in which malice aforethought is implied when the defendant engages in conduct demonstrating wanton and willful disregard that the natural tendency of the behavior is to cause death or great bodily harm. The required level of risk and indifference exceeds that needed for involuntary manslaughter based on criminal negligence or recklessness.
Carla managed a metal fabrication plant where a hydraulic press safety interlock repeatedly failed. To meet production quotas she disconnected the device and instructed workers including a new hire to continue clearing jams. When the press cycled unexpectedly it crushed a worker to death.
Carla directed a crewed rocket test after engineers reported major fuel tank cracks and urged delay because failure would be catastrophic. She dismissed the warnings and ordered liftoff anyway. The rocket exploded shortly after launch killing the test pilot.
On August 6, 1975, defendant Francis Aaron and his cousin Thomas St. Onge went to the home of Aaron's estranged wife Myra in Jackson, Michigan. Aaron was armed with a .22 caliber rifle and intended to frighten his wife into returning to him. When they arrived, Myra was not present, but her mother, brother, and two small children were there. Aaron and St. Onge waited for Myra to return. Upon her arrival an argument ensued between Aaron and his wife. Aaron's mother-in-law called the police. Aaron then shot and killed his wife and also shot and wounded his brother-in-law. Aaron was charged with first-degree murder contrary to MCL 750.316 and with assault with intent to commit murder contrary to MCL 750.83. The prosecutor proceeded on theories of premeditated murder and felony murder with arson as the underlying felony. At the preliminary examination the district judge bound Aaron over on the premeditated murder theory but refused to bind over on the felony-murder theory due to insufficient evidence of arson. The prosecutor appealed to the circuit court which reversed and held there was sufficient evidence of arson to bind over on the felony-murder theory. Aaron was tried before a jury in the Jackson Circuit Court on both theories. The jury returned a verdict of guilty of second-degree murder. Aaron appealed to the Court of Appeals which affirmed the conviction. Aaron applied for leave to appeal to the Michigan Supreme Court. The court granted leave limited to the issue of the continuing validity of the felony-murder doctrine in the state. The consolidated opinion also addresses two other cases. In People v. Thompson the defendant was convicted of first-degree felony murder resulting from a death during an armed robbery after the jury was instructed that intent to rob was sufficient without proving malice. The Court of Appeals reversed due to the lack of a malice instruction. In People v. Wright the defendant was convicted of two counts of first-degree felony murder for setting fire to a dwelling causing two deaths. The trial court instructed that proof the killings occurred during arson was sufficient and the Court of Appeals reversed for removing the malice element from the jury.
View caseDepraved mind murder requires a higher degree of recklessness showing extreme indifference to human life that implies malice. Involuntary manslaughter covers unintentional killings from a lower level of criminal negligence or recklessness that creates a substantial but less extreme risk of death.
Supporting sources
Some jurisdictions historically limited depraved mind murder to conduct endangering many people indiscriminately. Modern applications in many common law jurisdictions allow the doctrine when the defendant's conduct creates an extremely high risk to any human life with conscious disregard of that risk.
Jurisdictions differ. Some treat the mental state as requiring subjective awareness that intoxication can negate while others hold that self-induced intoxication does not excuse the conscious disregard of risk.
The defendant must consciously engage in extremely dangerous conduct that a reasonable person would recognize as posing a grave risk of death and proceed anyway without justification.
Supporting sources
…today in most jurisdictions: "(1) intent-to-kill murder; "(2) intent-to-do-serious-bodily-injury murder; "(3) depraved-heart murder [wanton and willful disregard that the natural tendency of the defendant's behavior is to cause death or great bodily harm]; and "(4) felony murder." Under the common law,…