People v. Vasquez
239 Cal. App. 4th 1512, 192 Cal. Rptr. 3d 383, 2015 Cal. App. LEXIS 766 (2015)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A dwelling is considered "inhabited" for first-degree burglary purposes if it is currently being used for dwelling purposes, even if temporarily unoccupied, provided the resident has demonstrated an intent to use the structure as a residence and intends to return.
Facts:
- On August 28, 2013, Charlotte Banks closed escrow on her newly purchased home at 931 Albany Avenue in Ventura, intending it as her primary residence.
- Prior to escrow closing, Banks arranged for the transfer of the home's utilities to her account, notified creditors of her changed address, and introduced herself to an Albany Avenue neighbor.
- On August 29, Banks brought painting supplies, tools, patio chairs, and a canvas bag containing clothing and hair extensions to the home, and she and friends painted the interior of the garage, leaving these items inside and locking all doors and windows before leaving for a friend's apartment for the night.
- On August 30, neighbors Jonathan and Maria De La Rosa observed Robert Terry Vasquez, a former tenant, and several companions enter Banks's home without permission.
- Maria De La Rosa, concerned because she knew Vasquez was no longer a tenant, telephoned for police assistance.
- When Banks arrived at her home at approximately 9:00 a.m. that morning, she found her canvas bag emptied and her hair extensions, bottled water, cookies, paint jars, a cordless screwdriver, and a GPS missing.
- Banks returned to her home early that afternoon and found the contents of her canvas bag again emptied onto the floor and a wristwatch on a shower rail, while a termite repairman noticed a stack of bricks beneath a partially open bathroom window.
- Vasquez admitted to police that he knew the home had been sold but decided "to check it," and later testified he entered believing his former roommate still lived there and re-entered to look for a companion's wristwatch.
Procedural Posture:
- A jury convicted Robert Terry Vasquez of residential burglary (count 1) and misdemeanor trespass (count 2).
- In a separate proceeding, Vasquez admitted to and the trial court found he served three prior prison terms within the meaning of Penal Code section 667.5, subdivision (b).
- The trial court sentenced Vasquez to a prison term of three years, consisting of a low term of two years for count 1 plus one year for one prior prison term served.
- Vasquez appealed the judgment to the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District.
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 newly purchased house become an "inhabited dwelling" for purposes of first-degree burglary when the owner has taken steps to establish residency, such as transferring utilities, introducing herself to a neighbor, bringing personal belongings, and performing renovations, even if she has not yet slept or cooked there?
Opinions:
Majority - Gilbert, P. J.
Yes, a newly purchased house becomes an "inhabited dwelling" for first-degree burglary purposes when the owner has taken steps to establish residency, such as transferring utilities, introducing herself to a neighbor, bringing personal belongings, and performing renovations, even if she has not yet slept or cooked there. The court affirmed the conviction, finding sufficient evidence that Banks's home was "inhabited" under Penal Code section 459, which defines "inhabited" as "currently being used for dwelling purposes, whether occupied or not." The court emphasized that the use of a house as sleeping quarters is not determinative, but rather one circumstance in deciding if a house is inhabited (People v. Hughes, 2002). Banks demonstrated her intent to inhabit the property by introducing herself to a neighbor, transferring utilities to her accounts, notifying creditors of her new address, and beginning painting and renovations. She also brought personal belongings, tools, and chairs into the home, locking it when she left. The court reasoned that Banks was "generally in or around the premises" (People v. Hansen, 1994; People v. Hernandez, 1992), which increased the danger of personal injury and the risk of a "violent confrontation during a burglary," the policy underlying the enhanced penalty for residential burglary. The court also rejected Vasquez's arguments regarding jury instructions on temporary absence and aiding and abetting, and his claim of mistake of fact, finding the instructions proper and any error harmless.
Analysis:
This case clarifies and reinforces the definition of an "inhabited dwelling" in California burglary law, extending its scope beyond traditional physical occupation. It emphasizes that a resident's demonstrated intent to use a structure as a home, coupled with concrete actions towards that end, is sufficient to qualify it as "inhabited," even before full move-in or overnight stays. This ruling broadens protection against burglary for individuals in the process of establishing a new residence, focusing on the potential for violent confrontation that residential intrusions pose, regardless of the owner's immediate presence. It provides guidance for future cases involving transient residency or homes undergoing renovation.
