
Quoting
L-1
I'm going to disagree with everyone.
The homeowner may use reasonable force to subdue and tie up the burglar. In effect, the homeowner has made a citizen's arrest and the burglar is in custody. Once that is done, the crime of burglary has ceased and the felony murder rule no longer applies to the burglar.
Now, we do not allow vigilante justice. So, if the homeowner attempts to strangle the tied up and helpless burglar, we have a new and fresh crime of attempted murder, where the burglar is the victim and the homeowner is the perpetrator. In this case, if the burglar were to somehow break free, he may use whatever force is reasonably necessary to defend his life, up to and including deadly force.
dang, using your argument it couldn't be felony murder if the tied up perp kicked the owner and owner fell and hit their head causing death due to some misplaced belief perp has now become victim.
The problem is, absent overwhelming evidence, no one is going to believe the burglar. So, if the homeowner is just injured and lies about what happened, the charges will be upped to include robbery. If he dies, the felony murder rule will be imposed on the assumption that the homeowner died during the commission of the burglary. In any case, it will be up to the burglar to prove in court that he was the true victim.
I would suggest this scenario is better off as a plot for a TV show.