 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
People v. Elsey6/23/2000
CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION
copy
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Shasta County. Monica Balavage, Judge.
Affirmed.
I. INTRODUCTION
In this appeal, we consider whether entry into six rooms at a single school constitutes six separate burglaries under Penal Code section 459.
A jury convicted defendant Lester Paul Elsey (defendant) of six counts of second degree burglary based upon his entry into five classrooms and the main office area of a middle school in Shasta County. He was sentenced to state prison for concurrent terms of two years on each count. On appeal, defendant contends that the trial court erred in instructing the jury that "each classroom and the main office constitute a separate building" for purposes of the burglary statute. He argues that the evidence is insufficient to establish "more than a single burglary of the school."
We conclude that the defendant was properly convicted of six counts of burglary. Both the statute's plain language and its purpose support such a determination. First, defendant's entry into separate rooms -- assigned to different people, locked to the outside, and largely located in separate buildings on the school campus -- constituted separate burglaries within the plain meaning of the California burglary statute, section 459, which defines burglary as the entry into "any . . . room . . . with intent to commit grand or petit larceny or any felony." Secondly, the purpose of the statute, which is to protect against the danger of unauthorized entries, is furthered if each intrusion into a separately secured room, whose occupants have an independent expectation of protection against intrusion, constitutes a separate burglary. Where strict adherence to a statute's plain language also furthers its statutory purpose, such an interpretation can be safely said to effectuate its legislative intent. Conversely, nothing in the statutory language or purpose of section 459 suggests that separate entries, each with the requisite intent, into multiple, secured classrooms should be viewed as the equivalent of a single entry into a single classroom, and thus, only one burglary. Otherwise, a burglar who entered various secured offices and classrooms located throughout a university campus would be guilty of only one burglary. That is not the law in California. Accordingly, we shall affirm the judgment.
II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Central Valley Intermediate School (CVI) was scheduled to hold its Medieval Festival on Friday, April 11, 1997. In preparation, tables and chairs for the festival's culminating "feast" -- a lunch for 500 students and guests -- were borrowed and set up outside on Thursday night.
Joe Brouillard, the principal at CVI during 1997, contacted Statewide Security to guard the borrowed items from 10:00 p.m. on Thursday, April 10 until 6:30 a.m. on Friday. Two guards from Statewide Security, defendant and Richard Maddox, duly arrived at 10:00 p.m. on Thursday. Principal Brouillard gave them a set of keys so that they could use the staff room, where there were restrooms, a telephone, and a soda machine. Although the keys also allowed entry into all of the rooms on the school campus, defendant and Maddox were not given permission to enter any other room.
As described by Principal Brouillard, the school's general physical layout consists of "an older building" in one corner, "three different wings connected with a fourth wing that runs north and south," and "three new portables . . . on the east south side."
Both the wings and portables contain classrooms. Each classroom has an outside door, whic
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 California Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|