Arizona's felony murder rule explained: It's murder even if you don't kill

Earlier this week, a man was charged with first-degree murder after a south Phoenix armed robbery left one of his accused accomplices dead.

But, Omar Rivas, the man charged, did not pull the trigger of the gun that killed 19-year-old Mia Padilla. The homeowner shot at the two, and another one of their accomplices as they fled from his house, court records show.

This charge against Rivas stems from Arizona's felony murder rule, under which a person can be charged with first-degree murder if they participated in certain felonies that resulted in someone's death, regardless of if they intended to kill. If convicted of first-degree murder, Rivas, and any other criminal defendant in similar situations could face a punishment of life in prison, or death.

Defendants in this situation could face the death penalty if they had a major role in the felony crime and showed reckless indifference to human life, according to a 1987 U.S. Supreme Court decision.

To receive the murder charge, an individual must have committed, or intended to commit select felonies in Arizona, varying from drug offenses to robbery. According to Arizona's first-degree murder statute, those are:

• Sexual conduct with a minor

• Sexual assault

• Molestation of a child

• Terrorism

• Certain marijuana offenses

• Certain drug offenses

• Certain narcotics offenses

• Involving or using minors in drug offenses

• Drive-by shooting

• Kidnapping

• Burglary

• Arson

• Robbery

• Escape in the first or second degree

• Child abuse

• Unlawful flight from a pursuing law enforcement car

The rule helps to serve as an accountability measure, according to former Maricopa County Attorney Rick Romley.

"What it basically attempts to do is let individuals know that if you are involved with a number of individuals that are committing a crime, and one of those individuals shoots and kills somebody, you can be responsible for it because you were part of that entire criminal activity," he said. "You may not have pulled the trigger, but you are part of the overall crime where death could have occurred."

In some cases, the application of the rule may make sense — in others, not so much. Romley explained that the rule is a controversial provision and prosecutors have to look at all the facts and exercise good judgment on whether or not to apply the rule.

For that reason, some criminal justice advocates have tried to repeal or narrow the rule. Last year, the Arizona legislature was presented with two bills to address the felony murder rule, but the deadline passed before they could receive a hearing.

House Bill 2655, sponsored by former Democratic state representative Domingo DeGrazia of Tuscon, would have stripped the rule from Arizona's books. The other bill was Senate Bill 1451, sponsored by former Democratic state Sen. Martín Quezada. Under that bill, if someone was not the actual killer, the rule could be applied if they intended to kill and assisted the killer in causing another person's death.

Five states in the U.S. have abolished or scaled back their felony murder law. Those are Kentucky, Hawaii, Michigan, Massachusetts, and Ohio. Other states have amended their statues, such as limiting the rule to apply only to the main perpetrator of the crime, not just a minor participant.

The rule has been abolished from some countries outside of the U.S., including its country of origin, Great Britain. It was ruled unconstitutional in Canada.

Elena Santa Cruz covers Mesa, Tempe and Glendale Police. Reach her at elena.santacruz@gannett.com.

This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: Why Arizona's controversial felony murder rule is on the books