People v. McIntyre
218 Ill. App. 3d 479, 161 Ill. Dec. 187, 578 N.E.2d 314 (1991)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An enclosed, attached porch that is used for daily living activities, such as sitting, eating, and cooking, is considered part of the 'living quarters' and therefore constitutes a 'dwelling' for the purposes of the residential burglary statute.
Facts:
- Betty Houser was on vacation and asked her daughter, Jana Chisenall, and son-in-law, Gary, to check on her house.
- The Houser's screened-in porch was a furnished, enclosed wooden structure attached to the house, which they used year-round for meals and cooking.
- On the evening of May 8, 1990, the Chisenalls did a check of the property and initially noticed nothing unusual.
- Shortly after leaving, they drove by again and saw a white station wagon parked next to the property.
- The Chisenalls observed two men running from the Houser's backyard toward the station wagon.
- When they approached the car, they saw only one occupant, Bruce McIntyre, who then sped away.
- They discovered a large gas grill, which was always kept on the screened-in porch, sitting in the middle of the backyard.
- The screen near the porch door had been torn and the unlocked porch door was open.
Procedural Posture:
- Bruce McIntyre was charged with residential burglary in the circuit court of Macon County.
- Following a bench trial, the trial court found McIntyre guilty.
- The court sentenced McIntyre to a six-year term of imprisonment.
- McIntyre, as appellant, appealed his conviction to the appellate court, arguing the State, as appellee, failed to prove he was guilty of residential burglary beyond a reasonable doubt.
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 the unlawful entry into an enclosed, attached, and furnished screened-in porch, used for regular living activities like eating and cooking, constitute residential burglary under an Illinois statute defining a 'dwelling' as a 'house... or other living quarters'?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Knecht
Yes, the unlawful entry into this porch constitutes residential burglary. The court determined that a structure's use, not its name, is dispositive in defining a 'dwelling.' Here, the porch was not merely an appendage but an integral part of the home's living quarters because it was enclosed, attached, furnished, and regularly used for activities such as sitting, eating, and cooking. This usage brings the porch within the statutory definition of a 'dwelling' as 'living quarters.' The court distinguished its holding from People v. Thomas, which found an attached garage was not necessarily a dwelling, by focusing on the specific residential activities that occurred on the porch, thus making it part of the sanctum of the home that the residential burglary statute is intended to protect. The court also affirmed the sufficiency of the evidence, finding that a rational trier of fact could infer from the circumstances that McIntyre was a participant in the crime.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies the scope of the term 'dwelling' in Illinois's residential burglary statute, establishing a functional, use-based test for attached structures. By focusing on how a space is actually used by its inhabitants (for 'sitting, eating, and cooking'), the court moved beyond a purely structural definition. This precedent provides a framework for future cases involving similar structures like sunrooms or enclosed patios, making it more likely they will be considered part of the 'dwelling' if they are integrated into the daily life of the residents. It signals that the key inquiry is whether the structure serves as part of the home's 'living quarters,' thus affording it the heightened protection of the residential burglary statute.
