There is an interesting case out of Orlando that raises questions about the use of felony murder charges by prosecutors whenever there is a fatality in the commission of a crime. Kody Roach was charged with felony murder even though he never fired a shot and the victim, Maria Fernada Godinez, 22, was actually killed by a police officer.
According to reports, three officers were dispatched to the Vixen Bar after a bouncer reported to a 911 operator that “I have a gun-wielding maniac. He set it on the bar top and he wielded it many times. I had to throw him out.” While the bouncer was unarmed, he was able to remove Roach from the bar but when the first two officers arrived, Officer Eduardo Sanguino and a fellow bicycle officer, Jeff Angel, they said that Roach was at the bar’s locked door.
News reports state that “surveillance video obtained by Vixen Bar shows Roach dropping his gun after he was kicked out of the bar for carrying a gun.” However, that does not appear to be the account of the officers.
They say that Roach walked to the street “pointing his right hand at the officers,” and ignored commands to get on the ground. Instead, he began to walk back toward the bar. Angel fired his Taser but said that the taser had little effect due to Roach’s loose clothing. They say that Roach went for his waistband with his right hand, and according to the affidavit in the case:
“In order to prevent an armed individual from causing harm to any members of the public or to any of the surrounding officers, Ofc. Sanguino discharges his firearm nine times striking Roach at least five times.”
They say that when he fell, Roach dropped a .40 caliber Ruger handgun from his right hand — a stolen gun that was later found the gun to be unloaded. Only Sanguino appears to have fired any shots.
It was then that the officers learned that one of their bullets had passed through a hole and hit Fernanda Godinez.
The use of the felony murder charge has long been controversial in such cases, particularly because some have questioned why an unarmed bouncer could remove Rouch but three officers had to fire multiple shots to subdue him. We have previously discussed the sharp statistical difference between officer shootings in this country as opposed to other countries.
Roach however has not been charged in the stolen-gun case — a charge stemming from the disappearance of a weapon from a friend’s apartment after an argument. Notably, Roach has a criminal history dating back to 2009 that includes charges of battery on a law-enforcement officer, grand theft, violating probation and driving with a suspended license.
The Florida felony murder statute (like virtually all such statutes) does not require that the perpetrator pull the trigger or even know of or support the ultimate act. He is only required to have been engaged in a felony during which a life was taken. However, the law was designed with murders in mind that were caused by co-conspirators like a partner shooting a convenience store clerk. Here it was the police who killed the woman and Rouch had an unloaded weapon. Ideally, such cases are handled by prosecutorial discretion but prosecutors today radically inflate charges to force defendants to take tough plea agreements or face life in prison.
The officers clearly have a right to defend themselves and they may indeed be cleared of any wrongdoing. However, there remains the question of whether the death of this young lady should be charged as murder against Rouch. He is by no means blameless of course but the case raises the question of the reasonable limits (or any limits) in the charging of felony murder in such cases.
What do you think?
Kudos: Michael Blott
David, rarely do we agree, today, this thread, we agree. Good post.
Bailers, good post. I’ve wondered why more cops don’t try to de-escalate. They’re trained to protect themselves first. De-escalation? What’s that? From what I’ve seen of most cops, they don’t have the mental capacity to learn the skills needed to de-escalate.
I’ve felt felony murder is morally wrong since I first understood what it is. Still do. Hold people responsible for their own actions, not those of others.
If the defendant were a felon then he would be committing a felony by virtue of possessing a firearm. I ran a check on this shitbird in Florida and he has no felony convictions. I could run him nationwide but that costs me money and I don’t care enough to pay.
Since he was not committing a felony that the officers could see, I do not see convicting him on Felony Murder
Do the cops get a chance to re-wright the report now that the surveillance video shows the gun being dropped before the shooting?
The defendant has been overcharged. There are two distinct issues here. The first is the propriety of the officers’ actions. The second is the propriety of the felony murder charge. Even if the officers are completely cleared of any wrongdoing, it does not automatically follow that the defendant should be charged with felony murder. The reason is that the felony murder statute requires a predicate felony, i.e., felonious activity by the defendant which directly contributes to the death of the innocent victim. I have yet to read anything which indicates that the defendant was engaged in the commission of a felony when the shooting occurred.
Mike, if he did not have a concealed weapons permit, then I believe that he would be committing a felony. If this were the case, that he does not have a concealed weapons permit, would that fact alone allow him to be charged with felony murder?
They might have a leg to stand on in this matter, but for the surveillance video of the bar…..
It’s been done as a distraction. Say the guy wasn’t charged with killing the woman the policeman shot. Everyone would be up in arms about the police shooting an innocent woman. Confuse and distract and walk away with murder. They know and use every trick in the book plus some they have only just thought up.
If the officer does take the shot(s), and ends up killing your wife (by accident), should the officer be to blame? If he doesn’t take the shot, and the gunman kills your child; is the officer to blame?
Something tells me that if instead of taking the shot the officer tries to reposition himself and your child gets killed by the gunman you’d blame the officer for not taking the shot.
Eventually the officer is going to say “screw you all” I’m not shooting anybody for anything. Be careful what you ask for.
Jack, Great scenario. But, haters gotta hate.
Haz, You might be our only racer here. Of course, we have many RAAACISTS, according to the PC Police.
A gunman is in your yard with his gun pointed at your child. a police officer is on the scene. He trains his gun on the would-be killer. Behind the killer is your house. Inside the house is your wife. The officer doesn’t know where she is. He has less than 1/2 second to decide whether or not to shoot.
Does he take the shot?
Back when I was a racer, I once spun my car so far off of the track that I needed a shuttle bus to find my way back. Off the track, across the grass, through a hedgerow, into a cabbage patch and across a tennis court. You get the idea.
The pit steward asked “Why’d you spin?” and I said “Because there was oil in the track.” The steward said “Why didn’t you avoid it?” and I said “Because I couldn’t see it.” I wouldn’t have purposely driven that curve if I knew there was oil right where I was aiming.
The officer couldn’t see whether the perp’s gun was loaded. It’s easy to say in hindsight “Why’d he shoot the guy if the guy’s gun was empty?” Because he couldn’t see that it was unloaded. All he saw was a hand going toward the waistband of someone who was reported to be a maniac with a gun.
As to whether the perp should be charged for causing the death of the unfortunate young woman, I’m inclined to say yes, because his actions led to the shooting. What I can’t say is what the severity of the charge should be. I just don’t know.
JMRJ, I know this is not really a legal blog anymore, but the law should still be presented. As such, recognizing that it is illegal to bring a gun into a bar in Florida, contrary to your position, would be an unreasonable assumption.
“Or, put another way. If, instead of calmly defusing what appears to be a very similar, if not exactly the same situation encountered by the police, the bartender had pulled out a gun, shot the mad several times and killed an innocent bystander by accident, would you still say that the suspect had caused the bartender to shoot?”
The answer is YES. Just because an innocent person is in the backdrop, you do not loose your right to self-defense. That’s why the law, as written, permits the use of lethal force when in reasonable fear for your life or that of someone else. You do your best to not put others in harm’s way. Even if the bad guy took a hostage and was using that hostage as a shield, you still have a right to defend yourself. –I understand the reluctance. That quickly goes away if that person started shooting 5 other people in the bar…wouldn’t it?
@Jack: Yes, well, Florida particulars aside you addressed the point this time, which was that the standard should be the same whether it’s a cop shooting or a civilian. Actually, I’d be open to the idea that cops should be given some limited degree more deference, for reasons I won’t go into right now.
In any case, a tragic situation here. And I also agree that second-guessing can be very unfair, again cop or civilian.
Jack, This is “second guessing cop” central. I’ve had guns pointed and fired @ me. They have NO IDEA.
Haz, I worked a felony murder case in KC. Two shitbirds robbed a liquor store and the owner shot and killed one of the robbers. The surviving robber was certainly culpable as was this a-hole. I just am ambivalent about felony murder. I was more OK w/ the case I worked than this one and to be perfectly honest, I don’t know why? I do agree w/ your assessment on the shooting itself. Particularly w/ the unloaded gun nonsense. To assume a gun is loaded is something one SHOULD do in ALL instances, even if it’s you handling your own gun that you’re “SURE” is unloaded. But, I’m preachin’ to the choir to you on that.
You can see the cop haters here pretty easily.
Michael Haz, One thing you’re sure to see in these parts is a lot of ignorance expressed by people who’s only experience with a pistol is what they see in the movies, or, at best, the firing range (years ago). They think it’s easy to hit an arm or a leg. They think cops can stop time and reposition themselves in less than 1/2 second. They think cops can see through walls. Better yet, they don’t want the cop to be able to defend himself unless he first goes around to the other side of a wall to make sure no one has moved into the line of fire.
If only life were as easy as they make it out to be.
Jack,
We give enormous power and responsibility to police. If they can’t handle second guessing when they use it, they’re in the wrong line of work.
“this officer just firing willy-nilly”
Do you have proof that the perp was standing absolutely motionless so that the cop could not have possibly missed hitting him? Or was the perp bobbing and weaving and walking and moving around?
“this officer just firing willy-nilly”
Do you have eye-witness proof of that? Or is it just your assumption, knowing nothing about the event?