Yes, but you are talking about a statutory modification to common law terms. In my state until 1992, any killing that was unintentional, but was done while violating a law was involuntary manslaughter. That included DUI. If you were drunk and killed someone, then it was a misdemeanor punishable by a maximum of one year in jail. The statute modified that.
But, according to my state’s common law:
First degree murder: lying in wait, by poison, premeditated and deliberated, intentional unlawful killing with malice. I think we all know this one.
Second degree murder: Unlawful, intentional killing with malice. Bring a baseball bat to a fist fight. The intent to kill can be presumed from a beating with a baseball bat, but no premeditation and deliberation.
Voluntary Manslaughter: Unlawful, intentional killing with no malice. The lack of malice is evidenced by provocation or heat of passion. A fist fight turns into a beating to death intentionally. Spouse catches another in open adultery.
Involuntary Manslaughter: Our court has held that it is an unlawful, unintentional killing with no malice. A killing which occurs during an unlawful act, or a lawful act done by unlawful means. As noted above, drunk driving deaths are now covered under its own statute. A good example would be if I was mad at someone and punched them in the back of the head. Unbeknownst to me, they just had brain surgery and bled out.
You want me to define malice? We could have a 3 month law school class on these intricacies. And my state does not even recognize the “depraved heart” or “malice murder” 2nd degree concept.
It may be easier to think of “voluntary manslaughter” as a crime having all the ingredients of murder, but culpability is reduced for one or more mitigating circumstance. Such a provocation. Or diminished responsibility.
This discussion also shows that there is no universal answer; it’s always necessary to ask " in what jurisdiction?"
In Canada, we don’t have the concept of malice at all as a defining feature for murder. Murder is an intentional killing. Murder 1 is premeditated, plus a few others (intentionally killing a police officer in the line of duty; intentionally killing the victim of a sexual assault as part of the assault). All other intentional killings are murder 2.
Manslaughter is a death caused by an illegal act, such as assault, with no intention to kill.
In the “finding your wife in bed with another guy” example, if there’s evidence of intentional killing, the charge would be murder. However, it is possible for an accused to argue that provocation reduces the charge to manslaughter.
No concept of “voluntary” versus “involuntary” manslaughter.
In Japan, killing someone in a traffic accident can result in negligent homicide, even if it’s just a mother distracted by her crying kids and runs a red light. Together with negligent injury, it’s the second most common crime is Japan, accounting for about a quarter of all reported crime.
IANAL but I did read about a case within the last year or two where a man died in police custody and the coroner’s report ruled it a homicide. They were clear to say that “homicide” just means a death caused by a person, and could be a any number of causes, not all of which are crimes. Here is a story on a similar case that makes the same point.
In my state, simple negligence causing a death is not even a crime. To be convicted of involuntary manslaughter from a traffic accident one must be grossly negligent or reckless. Examples:
Driving 45 in a 35 zone held to be simple negligence not gross negligence.
Running a red light: simple negligence when driver shown to have tried to “beat” a yellow light. Gross negligence when light has been red for 10 full seconds.
Driving 90 in a 65: gross negligence bordering on reckless
A driver on the road for 20 full hours with no sleep: reckless
And, only in WV: A driver searching the passenger floorboard in search of a tobacco spit cup, taking his eyes off the road for 11 full seconds: reckless
ETA: In some states, even unintentional killings that are done with reckless conduct is “depraved heart” or “malice murder.” The theory is that by engaging in reckless conduct, a person has placed such low value on other human life such that his actions are “depraved” and malice can be presumed. Under the theory that when a logical consequence of an intended course of action is death, a person can be held to have intentionally caused the death. Therefore it is depraved heart murder, charged as second degree murder as there was no premeditation and deliberation to kill.
Nitpick: I think you meant to say “Not every homicide is a murder.” Homicide is generally defined as killing a human being.
However, not all homicides are murder, or even necessarily a crime. Homicide includes lawful killings, manslaughter and murder.
For example, if somebody comes after you with a weapon and you take reasonable steps to defend yourself, but the other guy dies, that is a homicide but not a crime.
We could have a 3 month law school class on these intricacies. And my state does not even recognize the “depraved heart” or “malice murder” 2nd degree concept.