Also known as: felony merger doctrine · felony-merger doctrines · merger doctrine
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
2 senses
A common law rule under which inchoate offenses such as solicitation, attempt, and conspiracy are treated as misdemeanors. Completion of the principal felony by the defendant or another actor causes the inchoate conduct to merge into the completed crime, barring separate convictions on the preliminary charges.
A common law rule under which inchoate offenses such as solicitation, attempt, and conspiracy are treated as misdemeanors. Completion of the principal felony by the defendant or another actor causes the inchoate conduct to merge into the completed crime, barring separate convictions on the preliminary charges.
A historical common law doctrine that barred civil recovery for an act constituting both a tort and a felony. The tort claim was treated as subordinate to the offense against the Crown and merged into or was preempted by the felony.
A historical common law doctrine that barred civil recovery for an act constituting both a tort and a felony. The tort claim was treated as subordinate to the offense against the Crown and merged into or was preempted by the felony.
Each sense below has its own examples, sources, and questions.
Bob and Jeffrey agreed to divert medications and Bob solicited Gavin to assist. Gavin later completed the diversion. The completed felony absorbs the preliminary acts, so Bob cannot be convicted separately on the solicitation and conspiracy charges.
1 common questions
Yes. At common law the doctrine treats solicitation, attempt, and conspiracy as preliminary misdemeanors. When the principal felony is completed by any connected actor, the inchoate charges merge into the completed crime and separate convictions are barred.
Supporting sources
Defendant committed a felonious assault on Plaintiff causing severe injury. Plaintiff filed a civil tort suit for damages. Under the historical rule the tort claim merged into the felony, extinguishing any separate civil recovery for the same conduct.
Edward Moragne was a longshoreman employed by Gulf Florida Terminal Company. On April 23, 1967, he was killed while working aboard the vessel Palmetto State in the Port of Miami, Florida. A beam supporting hatch covers fell on him during the stowage of a cargo of fertilizer. Petitioner, his widow and representative of his estate, brought suit in the Circuit Court for Dade County, Florida, against respondent States Marine Lines, Inc., the vessel owner. She sought damages for wrongful death and for pain and suffering prior to death. The claims rested on theories of both negligence and unseaworthiness. States Marine removed the case to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida on diversity grounds under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332 and 1441. It filed a third-party complaint against Gulf Florida Terminal Company. The complaint asserted that any negligence or unseaworthiness resulted from Gulf's stevedoring operations. Both defendants moved to dismiss the wrongful-death claim based on unseaworthiness. The District Court dismissed the unseaworthiness portion of the complaint, citing The Tungus v. Skovgaard, and certified the order for interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit certified to the Florida Supreme Court the question whether the Florida wrongful-death statute, Fla. Stat. § 768.01, encompassed unseaworthiness. The state court answered in the negative. On return to the Court of Appeals, that court affirmed the dismissal. Earlier related proceedings in state court had produced an affirmance by the Florida District Court of Appeal, 236 So. 2d 80, and denial of certiorari by the Florida Supreme Court, 239 So. 2d 829. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
View caseA shipboard death gives rise to both a potential tort claim and a felony. Under the historical rule the tort merged into the felony and civil recovery was unavailable. Modern courts reject the bar and permit the wrongful death action to proceed.
Edward Moragne was a longshoreman employed by Gulf Florida Terminal Company. On April 23, 1967, he was killed while working aboard the vessel Palmetto State in the Port of Miami, Florida. A beam supporting hatch covers fell on him during the stowage of a cargo of fertilizer. Petitioner, his widow and representative of his estate, brought suit in the Circuit Court for Dade County, Florida, against respondent States Marine Lines, Inc., the vessel owner. She sought damages for wrongful death and for pain and suffering prior to death. The claims rested on theories of both negligence and unseaworthiness. States Marine removed the case to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida on diversity grounds under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332 and 1441. It filed a third-party complaint against Gulf Florida Terminal Company. The complaint asserted that any negligence or unseaworthiness resulted from Gulf's stevedoring operations. Both defendants moved to dismiss the wrongful-death claim based on unseaworthiness. The District Court dismissed the unseaworthiness portion of the complaint, citing The Tungus v. Skovgaard, and certified the order for interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit certified to the Florida Supreme Court the question whether the Florida wrongful-death statute, Fla. Stat. § 768.01, encompassed unseaworthiness. The state court answered in the negative. On return to the Court of Appeals, that court affirmed the dismissal. Earlier related proceedings in state court had produced an affirmance by the Florida District Court of Appeal, 236 So. 2d 80, and denial of certiorari by the Florida Supreme Court, 239 So. 2d 829. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
2 common questions
The doctrine held that a tort committed through a felonious act merged into the felony. Because the felony was an offense against the Crown and carried forfeiture of property, no civil recovery was permitted for the same conduct.
Supporting sources
No. The doctrine has been abandoned in modern American law. Courts now permit tort and wrongful death claims even when the underlying conduct also constitutes a felony.
Supporting sources
…substantial basis for the rule at common law is a feature of the early English law that did not survive into this century— the felony-merger doctrine. See Pollock, supra , at 52-57; Holdsworth, The Origin of the Rule in Baker v. Bolton , 32 L. Q. Rev. 431 (1916). According to this doctrine, the common law did not allow civil recovery…