Felony Murder, the Merger Limitation, and Legislative Intent in State v. Heemstra: Deciphering the Proper Role of the Iowa Supreme Court in Interpreting Iowa's Felony-Murder Statute

AuthorDouglas Van Zanten
PositionJ.D., The University of Iowa College of Law
Pages05

J.D., The University of Iowa College of Law, 2008; B.A., Northwestern College (Iowa), 2005. Special thanks to the editors and members of Volume 93 of the Iowa Law Review for their diligent and intelligent work on this Note and the good humor they supply daily. Thanks also to my parents, who have proven willing to give support and encouragement when I need it. And finally, thanks to my wonderful wife, Carrie, for expecting the best from me and always being willing to share a laugh. All remaining errors and omissions are mine.

Page 1567

I Introduction

Scholars have described the felony-murder doctrine as "[o]ne of the most controversial doctrines in the field of criminal law."1 The controversy directly results from the abnormal approach that the felony-murder doctrine takes to mens rea. The traditional form of murder requires proof that a defendant committed a criminal act with intent to kill, knowledge that the act may kill another, or gross recklessness.2 The felony-murder doctrine, on the other hand, permits a criminal to be found guilty of murder if the individual commits a felony resulting in the death of another even if the individual only had the requisite mens rea for the felony and did not intend to kill another person.3

In the State of Iowa, the controversy surrounding the doctrine culminated when the Iowa Supreme Court opted to severely limit its use in the 2006 case State v. Heemstra.4 Two feuding farmers, Heemstra and Lyon, entered into a heated argument on a rural country road in January 2003, and the argument ended with Heemstra shooting and killing Lyon after Lyon lunged at him.5 The district court found Heemstra guilty of murder after the judge issued a jury instruction permitting the jury to find Heemstra guilty of murder if he had willfully injured Lyon by dangerously brandishing his gun, a forcible felony in Iowa.6 On appeal, the Iowa Supreme Court, acting without any prompting by the Iowa Legislature, adopted a new limitation-the merger limitation-on the felony-murder doctrine and overturned Heemstra's conviction.7 The court's monumental decision and the emotionally charged facts of the case spawned a media frenzy.8

At the heart of this highly scrutinized decision lies a pertinent legal issue that deserves the attention of criminal-law scholars. The opinion calls into question the respective roles of the Iowa Legislature and Iowa courts in creating, interpreting, and applying the criminal law. The balance of powers among the different branches of the state government presents serious Page 1568 implications for many areas of Iowa law. However, the legislative and judicial powers in the criminal-law arena may have the most direct effect on the public's sense of justice.

This Note undertakes the challenge of analyzing this sensitive legal issue in the context of the felony-murder doctrine in Iowa and critiques the Iowa Supreme Court's decision in Heemstra, concluding that the felony-murder doctrine and merger limitation should be altered only by the legislature and not the courts. Part II of this Note presents the basic background of the felony-murder doctrine and its general application in the United States. Part III takes an in-depth...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT