People v. Hernandez
11 Cal. Rptr. 2d 739, 92 Daily Journal DAR 12505, 9 Cal. App. 4th 438 (1992)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A dwelling is considered 'inhabited' for the purposes of first-degree burglary once a new resident has moved all their belongings into it and connected the utilities, demonstrating an intent to use it as a settled residence, even if they have not yet slept there.
Facts:
- On September 1, 1990, Stephen Kirkreit and his family moved all of their furniture and personal belongings into a new apartment on Mitchell Avenue.
- The family left nothing behind at their old residence.
- The utilities had been turned on at the new apartment.
- After finishing the move at 9 p.m., the Kirkreit family spent the night with relatives because none of their belongings were unpacked.
- The next morning, the Kirkreits returned to the apartment and discovered the locked front door was open.
- A VCR, stereo receiver, and some clothing were missing from the apartment.
- Police found fingerprints matching those of Rafael Aguirre Hernandez on a piece of glass from a broken rear window, which was determined to be the point of entry.
- The Kirkreit family did not spend their first night in the apartment until September 3, two days after the burglary.
Procedural Posture:
- Rafael Aguirre Hernandez was charged with first-degree burglary in a California trial court.
- A jury convicted Hernandez of first-degree burglary.
- The trial court also found true special allegations regarding Hernandez's prior convictions and imposed a sentence.
- Hernandez (appellant) appealed the judgment to the California Court of Appeal.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a dwelling become 'inhabited' for the purposes of a first-degree burglary conviction when a family has moved all of their personal property into the residence and connected the utilities, but has not yet slept in it overnight?
Opinions:
Majority - Dabney, J.
Yes, the dwelling was inhabited. A residence is considered 'inhabited' under the burglary statute if it is currently being used for dwelling purposes, which does not strictly require that someone has slept in it. The court rejected the older view that sleeping in a house is the critical element, noting that legislative amendments to the burglary statute have deemphasized this factor. Unlike prior cases where a dwelling was found uninhabited because a new tenant had not yet moved in any belongings (Valdez) or an old tenant had already moved out (Cardona), the Kirkreits had demonstrated their intent to make the apartment their residence. They had moved all of their belongings into the apartment and connected the utilities, establishing it as their place of settled residence from which they were merely temporarily absent.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies the definition of an 'inhabited dwelling' for first-degree burglary, moving away from a rigid requirement that the residents must have slept in the premises. The court establishes a more flexible, intent-based standard focusing on whether the structure is being used as a 'place of settled residence.' This precedent makes it easier to secure first-degree burglary convictions in transitional scenarios, such as during a move, by focusing on indicia of residency like the presence of all belongings and connected utilities, rather than the physical presence of the occupants for sleeping.
