People v. Villalobos
51 Cal. Rptr. 3d 678, 2006 Daily Journal DAR 15633, 145 Cal. App. 4th 310 (2006)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A hotel or motel room currently being used for purposes of habitation is an 'inhabited dwelling house' under first degree robbery and burglary statutes, regardless of the duration of the rental period.
Facts:
- On November 7, 2004, Roy Anthony Miller rented a room at the Peppertree Motel in Ontario for one night.
- Miller intended to use the room to use methamphetamine and 'party' with a female acquaintance.
- Miller agreed to let another acquaintance, Bernadette Maria Osika, come to the room to use drugs with him.
- Shortly after Osika's arrival, two men, including Brandon Villalobos, knocked on the door.
- Osika identified Villalobos as her boyfriend and opened the door, allowing him and the other man to enter.
- Villalobos and his companion threatened Miller with knives, robbed him of cash and personal items, and hit him in the temple.
- After the men left, Miller discovered his car keys and car were also missing from the motel parking lot.
- Villalobos was an admitted member of the Ontario Varrio Sur (OVS) criminal street gang.
Procedural Posture:
- Brandon Villalobos and Bernadette Maria Osika were charged in a trial court with offenses including first degree burglary and first degree robbery.
- The defendants were tried jointly but to separate juries.
- The trial court instructed the juries that 'An occupied motel room is an inhabited dwelling house.'
- Both juries convicted the defendants of first degree burglary and robbery, and found various gang and weapon enhancements to be true.
- The trial court sentenced Villalobos to 16 years to life in prison and Osika to 15 years to life in prison.
- Both defendants (appellants) filed a timely appeal to the Court of Appeal, challenging their convictions.
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 an occupied motel room rented for a single night qualify as an 'inhabited dwelling house' for the purposes of California's first degree robbery and burglary statutes?
Opinions:
Majority - McKinster, J.
Yes, an occupied motel room rented for a single night qualifies as an 'inhabited dwelling house.' The purpose of the first degree burglary and robbery statutes is to protect the safety and security of individuals in places of habitation. The term 'inhabited dwelling house' is given a broad definition focused on the character of the building's use, not the duration of residency. People have a reasonable expectation of privacy and security in a motel room where they sleep, bathe, and store personal belongings, making them vulnerable. This protection applies whether the habitation is permanent or temporary, as the danger of violent confrontation with an intruder is the same. The 'intent to return' test is relevant for determining when a formerly inhabited dwelling becomes uninhabited (i.e., abandoned), not for determining if a temporary lodging qualifies as a habitation in the first instance.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies that the legal definition of an 'inhabited dwelling' for serious felonies like first degree burglary and robbery is based on the use of a space for habitation, not the duration of occupancy. By rejecting the argument that a short-term rental is not a dwelling, the court affirmed that the heightened legal protection afforded to homes extends to temporary lodgings like motel rooms. This prevents the creation of a loophole that would treat invasions of such spaces less severely, reinforcing the principle that burglary laws are primarily designed to protect personal safety in any place of repose, however temporary.
