Conn. Crim. Jury Instr. 5.4-1

Note: The court should instruct the jury on the charged underlying felony prior to this

instruction.

The defendant is charged [in count __] with felony murder. The statute defining this offense

reads in pertinent part as follows:

a person is guilty of murder when, acting either alone or with one or more persons,

(he/she) commits or attempts to commit <insert one of the following:>

• robbery,

• home invasion,

• burglary,

• kidnapping,

• sexual assault in the first degree,

• aggravated sexual assault in the first degree,

• sexual assault in the third degree,

• sexual assault in the third degree with a firearm,

• escape in the first degree,

• escape in the second degree,

and, in the course of and in furtherance of such crime or of flight therefrom, (he/she),

or another participant, if any, causes the death of a person other than one of the

participants.

For you to find the defendant guilty of this charge, the state must prove the following elements

beyond a reasonable doubt:

Element 1 - Committed a felony

The first element is that the defendant, acting alone or with one or more other persons,

committed or attempted to commit the crime of <insert underlying felony and, if the felony is not

charged in another count, instruct on the elements of that offense>.

[<If the underlying felony is charged in another count:> Proof of this element will depend on

your deliberations pertaining to count <insert number of count charging underlying felony> on

which I have already instructed you. If you find the defendant guilty of <insert underlying

felony> in count <insert number of count charging underlying felony>, then this element of

felony murder will be proven.]

Element 2 - Caused the death of another person

The second element is that the actions of the defendant or another participant in the crime of

<insert underlying felony> were the proximate cause of the death of <insert name of decedent>.

You must find proved beyond a reasonable doubt that <insert name of decedent> died as a result

of the defendant’s or another participant’s actions. <See Proximate Cause, Instruction 2.6-1.>

Element 3 - In the course of committing a felony

The third element is that the defendant or another participant caused the death of <insert name of

decedent> while in the course of, and in furtherance of, the commission or attempted

commission of the crime of <insert underlying felony>, or, in immediate flight from the crime.

This means that the death occurred during the commission of the <insert underlying felony> and

in the course of carrying out its objective.

“In the course of the commission” of the <insert underlying felony> means during any part of the

defendant’s participation in the <insert underlying felony>. The phrase “in the course of the

commission” is a time limitation and means conduct occurring immediately before the

commission, during the commission or in the immediate flight after the commission of the

<insert underlying felony>. The immediate murder of a person to eliminate a witness to the

crime or to avoid detection is also “in the course of the commission.” Thus, the death of <insert

name of decedent> must have occurred somewhere within the time span of the occurrence of the

facts which constitute the <insert underlying felony>.

“In furtherance of” the <insert underlying felony> means that the killing must in some way be

causally connected to or as a result of the <insert underlying felony>, or the flight from the

<insert underlying felony>. The actions of the defendant that caused the death of <insert name

of decedent> must be done to aid the <insert underlying felony> in some way or to further the

purpose of the <insert underlying felony>.

It does not matter that the act that caused the death was committed unintentionally or

accidentally, rather than with the intention to cause death, nor does it matter if the death was the

result of <insert name of decedent>’s fear or flight. The defendant is as guilty when committing

this form of murder as (he/she) would be if (he/she) had intentionally committed the act that

caused the death.

Element 4 - Victim was not a participant

The fourth element is that <insert name of decedent> was not a participant in the <insert

underlying felony>. A participant is one who takes part or shares in the underlying crime.

Conclusion

In summary, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that 1) the defendant, acting alone

or with one or more other persons, committed or attempted to commit <insert underlying

felony>, 2) the defendant or another participant in the <insert underlying felony> caused the

death of <insert name of decedent>, 3) the defendant or another participant in the <insert

underlying felony> caused the death while in the course of, and in furtherance of, the

commission or attempted commission of the <insert underlying felony>, or, in immediate flight

from the crime, and 4) <insert name of decedent> was not a participant in the crime of <insert

underlying felony>.

If you unanimously find that the state has proved beyond a reasonable doubt each of the elements

of the crime of felony murder, then you shall find the defendant guilty. On the other hand, if you

unanimously find that the state has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt any of the

elements, you shall then find the defendant not guilty.

1 Home invasion was added to the list of felonies supporting a charge of felony murder by Public

Acts 2015, No. 211, § 3, effective October 1, 2015.

2 Although the defendant must be found guilty of one of the predicate felonies listed in § 53a-

54c, he/she need not be charged separately with that felony. Accordingly, it is not inconsistent

for a defendant to be found guilty of, e.g., felony murder based on an uncharged robbery in the

third degree but acquitted of a separate charge of robbery in the first degree. State v. Arroyo, 104

Conn. App. 167, 182-84 (2007), aff’d on other grounds, 292 Conn. 558 (2009), cert. denied, 559

U.S. 911 (2010). For a comprehensive discussion of the law governing inconsistent verdicts of

guilt and acquittal, see State v. Henderson, 348 Conn. 648, 656-63 (2024), in which the Supreme

Court reaffirmed its holdings in State v. Arroyo, supra, that such verdicts are permissible and that

the inconsistency is not a reviewable issue on appeal.

If the underlying felony is an attempt crime, the court must instruct the jury on the definition of

criminal attempt. Small v. Commissioner of Correction, 286 Conn. 707, 727 (2008). See

Attempt -- § 53a-49 (a) (1), Instruction 3.2-1 and Attempt -- § 53a-49 (a) (2), Instruction 3.2-2.