Question

In a jurisdiction that has abolished the felony-murder rule, but otherwise follows the common law of murder, Sally and Ralph, both armed with automatic weapons, went into a bank to rob it. Ralph ordered all the persons in the bank to lie on the floor. When some were slow to obey, Sally, not intending to hit anyone, fired about 15 rounds into the air. One of these ricocheted off a stone column and struck and killed a customer in the bank.

Sally and Ralph were charged with murder of the customer.
Which of the following is correct?
(A) Sally can be convicted of murder, because she did the act of killing, but Ralph cannot be convicted of either murder or manslaughter.
(B) Neither can be guilty of murder, but both can be convicted of manslaughter based upon an unintentional homicide.
(C) Sally can be convicted only of manslaughter, but Ralph cannot be convicted of murder or manslaughter.
(D) Both can be convicted of murder.

Answer 1

(D) Both can be convicted of murder.

Step-by-step explanation:

The common law of murder refers to the murderous act of taking someone's life regardless of the intention. This criminal act is an element of malice aforethought, terming any criminal act with predetermined intent as common law.

In the case of Sally and Ralph, though the ricocheting bullet was not intended. their predetermined intent in robbing the bank means they are culpable of ac crime. And in that course of action, the accidental killing of one of the bank's customers makes them guilty of the crime of murder.

Thus, the correct answer is option D.