FELONY. An offence which occasions a total forfeiture of either lands or goods, or both, at common law, to which capital or oth er punishment may be superadded, according to the degree of guilt. 4 Bla. Com. 94 ; 1 Russ. Cr. 78 ; Co. Litt. 391; 1 Hawk. Pl. Cr. c. 37; U. S. v. Smith, 5 Wheat. (U. S.) 153, 5 L. Ed. 57. The essential distinction be tween felony and misdemeanor is lost in Eng land since the Felony Act of 1870. The dis tinction there is perfectly arbitrary. At the present day in this country it simply denotes the degree or class of crime committed; 1 Bish. New Cr. L. § 616.
Blackstone derives it from the Saxon peo or peoh, fee or feud, and the German Ion, price, as being a. crime punishable with the loss of the feud or bene fice. 4 Cora. 95. But It Is observed that this Saxon word originally signified money or goods, and only in a translated sense feud or inheritance ; Lye, Sax. Diet.; and anothe'r commentator remarks, "as in petit larceny the lands are not liable to escheat,' and petit larceny has always been ranked among felonies, a later writer seems inclined to derive it from pcelen in the sense of offending. 2 Wooddes. 510." Bac. Abr. Felony. In 2 Holdsw. Hist. E. L. 302, it is said to be derived, probably, from the Latin fell or fel, meaning gall—an offence which is venomous or poisonous, citing 2 Poll. & Maitl. 463. Pothier defines felony as an atrocious wrong commit-. ted by a vassal towards his lord, by which the former forfeited his fief to the latter.
In American law the word has no clearly defined meaning at common law, but includes offences of a considerable gravity ; People v. Van Steenburgh, 1 Park. Cr. Rep. (N. Y.) 39 Matthews v. State, 4 Ohio St: 542. In gen eral, what is felony under the English com mon law is such under ours ; 1 Bish. Cr. L. § 617; Clark, Cr. L. 33. A crime is not a fel ony unless so declared by statute, or it was such at the common law ; State v. Murphy, 17 R. I. 698, 24 Atl. 473, 16 L. R. A. 550. If a statute creates a non-capital offence, not de claring it to be felony, the law will give it the lower grade of misdemeanor ; State v. Hill, 91 N. C. 561.
The United States Revised Statutes con tain no definition of the word, and the mean ing of § 4090, referring to "offences against the public peace amounting to felony under the laws of the United States," is not alto gether clear. But in the United States Crim inal Code, § 335, all offences punishable by death or by imprisonment for over one year are felonies ; all other offenses are niisde manors. It is defined by statute in many of the states, usually, in effect, that all of fences punishable either by death or impris onment in the state prison shall be felonies. People v. Hughes, 137 N. Y. 29, 32 N. E. 1105 ; Territory v. Godfrey, 6 Dak: 46, 50 N. W.
481; U. S. v. Coppersmith, 4 Fed. 198, 2 Flip. 551. Express words or necessary implication are required and doubtful words will not suf fice; 1 Bish. New Cr. L. § 622. "When an act of congress makes punishable a crime which under the common law is felony, a for tiori when directly or by necessary implica tion, it declares a thing to be felony, it is felony; but where a national statute creates a non-capital offence, and is silent as to its grade, it is misdemeanor." 1 Bish. New Cr. L. § 671. See U. S. v. Wynn, 9 Fed. 886, which holds that common-law felonies are not within the purview of the constitution un less congress so enacts.
Where a statute permits a milder punish ment than imprisonment or death, this dis cretion does not prevent the offence being felony ; People v. War, 20 Cal. 117; State v. Melton, 117 Mo. 618, 23 S. W. 8b9. See Ben ton v. Com., 89 Va. 570, 16 S. E. 725 ; State v. Harr, 38 W. Va. 58, 17 S. E. 791; contra in Illinois ; Lamkin v. People, 91 la 501. It has also been held that common-law felonies, punishable less severely than the statutory standard, do not, therefore, cease to be fel onies ; Drennan v. People, 10 Mich. 169 ; Ward v. People, 3 Hill (N. Y.) 393 ; , but see Carpenter v. Nixon, 5 Hill (N. Y.) 260 ; 1 Bish. Cr. L. § 620.
Receiving stolen goods was a felony so as to justify arrest without a warrant; Rohan .v. Sawin, 5 Cush. (Mass.) 281; Wakely v. Hart, 6 Binn. (Pa.) 316, 2 Term 77. The fol lowing have been held not: Adultery ; State v. Brunson, 2 Bail. (S. C.) 149; Anderson v. Coln., 5 Rand. (Va.) 627, 16 Am. Dec. 776; State v. Cooper, 16 Vt. 551; assault with in tent to murder ; State v. Boyden, 35 N. C. 505; impeding an officer in the discharge of his duty ; State v. Noyes, 25 Vt. 415 ; involun tary manslaughter by negligence; Shields v. Yonge, 15 Ga. 349, 60 Am. Dec. 6,98 ; Com. v. Gable, 7 S. & R. (Pa.) 423 ; maybem; Adams v. Barrett, 5 Ga. 404 ; Com. v. Newell, 7 Mass. 245 ; perjury ; A. v. B., 1 R. M. Charlt. (Ga.) 228; 5 Exch. 378 ; piracy ; 1 Salk. 85 ; Mau ro v. Almeida, 10 Wheat. (U. S.) 493, 6 L. Ed. 369. In England none of the maritime crimes were felony ; Story, Const. § 1162.
One may be guilty of misprision of felony, but not of a misdemeanor. In misdemeanor or treason one may commit the crime of a principal by procuring another to do the ac tion in his absence; but in felony such per son is only an accessory before the fact. A person against whose property a misdemean or has been committed may sue the offender at once, but in case of felony he must by the better opinion first begin prosecution ; 1 Bish. New Cr. L. § 609. Felonies cannot be prosecuted by information; U. S. v. Wynn, 9 Fed. 893. See COMPOUNDING A FELONY.