North Carolina Felony Murder Rule

In North Carolina, if someone is killed during the commission or attempted commission of certain felonies involving a deadly weapon, the offense may be charged as first-degree murder under what is commonly called the “felony murder rule.” Under this doctrine, a homicide arising from the perpetration or attempted perpetration of such a felony is treated as first-degree murder, even in the absence of premeditation or deliberation.

The recent appellate decision State v. Middleton (N.C. Ct. App. 2025) sheds light on how felony murder interacts with allegations of felony child abuse. While the underlying facts involved minors and grave injuries, the published opinion concentrates on the broader legal principles relevant to attorneys, law students, and others interested in North Carolina’s felony murder framework.

This post covers:

An Overview of the Felony Murder Doctrine in North Carolina
How Felony Murder Applies to Child Abuse Cases
Felony Child Abuse: Essential Statutory Elements
Sufficiency of the Evidence in Felony Murder and Child Abuse Trials
The ‘Inherently Incredible’ Testimony Doctrine
Constitutional Challenges and Waiver
Conclusion: Practical Takeaways

If you have questions about felony murder charges, or interested in how North Carolina law applies to felony child abuse allegations, give the legal team at the Powers Law Firm for guidance. You can text or call 704-342-4357, or email Bill Powers directly at Bill@CarolinaAttorneys.com to schedule a confidential consultation.

1. Overview: Felony Murder in North Carolina

Under North Carolina General Statutes, first-degree murder can be proven in multiple ways, including premeditation and deliberation or the felony murder rule. Specifically, N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-17(a) states that a murder committed during the perpetration or attempted perpetration of certain felonies “shall be deemed to be murder in the first degree.” Traditional examples include robbery, rape, kidnapping, burglary, and arson. However, felony child abuse can also qualify as the underlying crime, as highlighted in State v. Middleton.

1.1 “Deadly Weapon” Requirement

One potential element of felony murder (in some instances) is the use of a deadly weapon. While a firearm or knife clearly qualifies, North Carolina case law has long established that hands can be deemed deadly weapons when used with sufficient force against a vulnerable victim. This principle may arise in cases where an adult caretaker is accused of causing significant or fatal injuries to a minor.

1.2 No Separate Proof of Intent to Kill

The felony murder doctrine does not require proof of any specific intent to kill; the prosecution must show only that the death occurred during the commission of the felony. If the State can prove that the defendant perpetrated or attempted a dangerous felony involving a deadly weapon, criminal liability for first-degree murder can attach without further evidence that the defendant actually intended or premeditated the killing.

Understanding Dismissal of Charges

2. Applying the Felony Murder Doctrine to Child Abuse Cases

Child abuse may serve as the predicate offense for a felony murder charge if:

The defendant was engaged in felony child abuse (e.g., intentional infliction of serious bodily injury on a minor).
The child’s death resulted from those abusive acts.
A “deadly weapon” was used, which might include hands or fists, depending on the circumstances.

In State v. Middleton, the defendant was found guilty of first-degree murder under this theory. The court explained that sufficient evidence of an intentional assault or purposeful harm to a minor can justify treating the caretaker’s hands as a deadly weapon, especially if the resulting injury is severe or fatal.

3. Felony Child Abuse: Statutory Elements

3.1 N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-318.4(a3)

Under North Carolina law, it is a Class B2 felony for any parent or caretaker to intentionally inflict serious bodily injury on a child under 16. This is often called felony child abuse inflicting serious bodily injury. To secure a conviction, the prosecution must prove:

Age and Relationship: The victim is under 16, and the perpetrator is a parent or caretaker.
Intentional Act: The caretaker inflicted harm through an intentional act, not a mere accident or oversight.
Serious Bodily Injury: The child suffered bodily harm that poses a substantial risk of death, causes extreme pain, results in permanent or protracted disfigurement or impairment, or requires prolonged hospitalization.

3.2 Serious Bodily Injury

The statute defines “serious bodily injury” in § 14-318.4(d)(1) to include injuries creating a significant risk of death or substantial long-term impairment. In Middleton, evidence of head trauma, skull fractures, or related injuries satisfied this element, especially where the injuries required extensive hospitalization or caused life-threatening complications.

3.3 General Intent, Not Specific Intent

The term “intentionally” in child abuse cases does not require proof of an intent to kill. Rather, it demands proof that the act leading to the injury was purposeful. For instance, picking up a child and violently shaking them can meet this threshold if the child’s injuries are consistent with severe, non-accidental force.

Art of Plea Negotiations & Plea Bargains

4. Sufficiency of the Evidence in Felony Murder and Child Abuse Trials

Defense counsel in State v. Middleton argued that the evidence was insufficient to support either charge. North Carolina courts, however, apply a well-settled standard:

Evidence is viewed in the totality and in a light most favorable to the State, giving the State the benefit of every reasonable inference.
The question is whether there is “substantial evidence” of each element, not whether the evidence excludes every conceivable doubt.

4.1 Exclusive Custody and Non-Accidental Injuries

A key principle sometimes highlighted is that if a defendant had exclusive custody of a minor during the time serious injuries are sustained, and the injuries are inconsistent with accidental causes, a jury can reasonably infer that the defendant intentionally inflicted harm.

In Middleton, expert medical testimony indicated that the minors’ injuries (including brain bleeds and possible fractures) typically result from violent shaking or strong blunt-force trauma. Because the defendant was the only adult present during the critical window, and the harm could not be readily explained by minor mishaps, jurors had a basis to find the defendant responsible for intentionally causing the injuries.

4.2 Deadly Weapon and Felony Murder

For felony murder predicated on child abuse, the final element is that the abuse was carried out “with the use of a deadly weapon.” Courts may interpret the phrase “deadly weapon” broadly when a caretaker’s physical force is likely to produce death or serious injury, which may become relevant when the victim is a newborn or infant and particularly susceptible to bodily harm. In Middleton, the Court found the State presented substantial evidence that the caretaker’s hands caused severe cranial or skeletal trauma, satisfying the deadly weapon requirement.

Are Patdown Frisks Legal?

5. “Inherently Incredible” Testimony and Credibility Determinations

A second appellate argument in Middleton centered on whether a jailhouse snitch’s accounts were so “inherently incredible” that they should not have gone to the jury. North Carolina courts consider State v. Miller, 270 N.C. 726 (1967), which sets forth the principle that testimony may be excluded if it is “physically impossible or impossible under the laws of nature.” For example, if a witness swears that the defendant was visible in a pitch-black room from a mile away with no lights, the court could deem that testimony impossible as a matter of science.

5.1 Jury’s Role in Assessing Credibility

Outside of truly impossible scenarios, juries decide witness credibility. In Middleton, the caretaker alleged that certain statements made by an informant or other witnesses were so inconsistent as to be unbelievable. The appellate court rejected this claim, emphasizing that:

Minor inconsistencies or possible motivations for lying are for cross-examination, not grounds for preemptive exclusion.

Testimony is not inherently incredible merely because it contains discrepancies or changes over time.

The fact-finder (jury) remains the ultimate arbiter of truthfulness unless there is a clear impossibility.

Since none of the challenged testimony in Middleton contradicted “indisputable physical facts,” the court concluded that the evidence properly reached the jury.

6. Constitutional Challenges and Waiver

A further argument was whether certain statements were obtained in violation of the caretaker’s constitutional rights under the Fifth Amendment and Sixth Amendment. The issue involved whether an informant effectively functioned as a state agent, eliciting incriminating comments without counsel present. However, the appellate court did not address this issue on its merits, citing the rule that:

A defendant must object at trial on the specific constitutional basis if they wish to preserve it for appellate review.
Constitutional claims not raised before the trial court are waived and cannot be argued for the first time on appeal.

Because defense counsel did not lodge a contemporaneous objection asserting constitutional violations, the Court found the arguments unpreserved. Although North Carolina recognizes a narrow “plain error” doctrine for certain trial errors, courts may decline to apply it to brand-new constitutional arguments. Hence, the constitutional challenges were deemed forfeited.

Fourth Amendment Rights & Traffic Stops

7. Conclusion: Practical Takeaways

State v. Middleton highlights several important aspects of the felony murder rule and child abuse charges in North Carolina:

Felony Child Abuse as a Felony Murder Predicate
- When a death results from intentional harm inflicted on a child, felony child abuse can serve as the underlying felony for a first-degree murder conviction under the felony murder rule.
Expansive Interpretation of “Deadly Weapon”
- Courts have consistently recognized that an adult’s hands may be treated as a deadly weapon if the victim is especially vulnerable (such as an infant) and the force used is sufficient to cause life-threatening injuries.
General Intent, Not Specific Intent
- Felony child abuse inflicting serious bodily injury requires an intentional act but no specific intent to kill. The State need not prove that the defendant specifically intended the child’s death—only that the defendant purposefully inflicted serious harm.
Sufficiency of Evidence and Exclusive Custody
- In child abuse prosecutions, if the defendant was the only caregiver present and the child’s injuries are non-accidental, the case proceeds to the finder of the fact, the jury. Medical expert testimony on the nature of injuries may be critical to establish they are inconsistent with ordinary accidents.
Inherently Incredible vs. Merely Inconsistent Testimony
- Testimony that is merely inconsistent or suspicious does not reach the threshold of being “inherently incredible.” Unless it contradicts established laws of nature, it is for the jury to decide its believability.
Preserving Constitutional Objections
- Challenges based on alleged violations of constitutional rights must be specifically raised at trial. Failure to do so generally waives those claims on appeal.

In reaffirming the defendant’s convictions, the Court of Appeals again makes clear that North Carolina’s felony murder doctrine can be broad and does not require proof that a defendant planned or intend to kill the victim. Rather, it is the lethal outcome of a dangerous felony—here, the infliction of severe injuries upon a minor—that may trigger first-degree murder criminal liability.

For anyone facing felony murder charges or felony child abuse cases in North Carolina, State v. Middleton is a reminder that:

Hands can be weapons under the law when used violently against a small child.
Medical evidence of skull fractures, brain bleeds, or other severe trauma resonates with jurors regarding intent and the non-accidental nature of an injury.
Witness credibility remains a matter for the jury unless the testimony is physically impossible.
Constitutional safeguards must be invoked at trial to be preserved on appeal.

These principles collectively shape how criminal defense lawyers frame arguments about guilt, intent, and the role of caretaker responsibilities under North Carolina statutes. They also illustrate the power of the felony murder rule in securing first-degree murder convictions where minors lose their lives during acts of serious abuse.

In North Carolina, parents and other caretakers risk first degree murder charges under the felony murder doctrine if their felony child abuse leads to a killing. This can happen when a defendant commits a willful act of assault resulting in serious bodily injury or serious physical injury that causes the death of a minor. Even without a specific intent to kill, prosecutors may argue that the defendant’s conduct—such as violently shaking a child—constitutes a reckless disregard for human life, thereby satisfying the felony element for first degree murder.

Under these circumstances, the underlying felony is child abuse, and the person can be convicted of felony murder if the bodily injury sustained is so grave that it meets the statutory threshold of serious bodily injury, such as a permanent or protracted loss of function. Because the law treats an adult’s hands as a deadly weapon when used against vulnerable children, such charges carry severe penalties. Moreover, the North Carolina courts recognize that a grossly negligent omission—failing to intervene or protect—can also expose the caretaker to criminal liability if it reflects a reckless disregard for the child’s safety and leads to the child’s death.

The felony murder rule in North Carolina not only covers felony child abuse and felony murder in North Carolina, but also extends to offenses such as kidnapping or arson if a killing transpires in connection with those crimes. Felony child abuse can be classified in various ways, ranging from a class D felony or class E felony to a class G felony, depending on the specifics of the crime and the degree of physical injury.

An especially egregious instance of child abuse might involve an intentional act causing great pain, mental injury, or other harm so severe that it leads to protracted loss of normal functioning. When someone does intentionally inflict harm that rises to this level, the defendant can face prison sentences under first degree murder or felonious child abuse statutes.

Indeed, the protection of children has long been described as the “polar star” in both civil and criminal law in North Carolina. If parents or caretakers commit abuse that ends a human life, the prosecution may seek first degree murder liability. By imposing these heightened classifications and punishments, North Carolina law seeks to deter abuse and safeguard children from suffering irreparable harm.

If you or someone you know is facing felony murder or felony child abuse charges in North Carolina, it’s important to immediately seek experienced legal advice to protect your rights and navigate the complexities of the justice system. Please feel free to reach out to the legal team at Powers Law Firm by calling or texting 704-342-4357, or email Bill Powers directly at Bill@CarolinaAttorneys.com to schedule a confidential consultation.