State v. Lockhart
438 So. 2d 1089 (1983)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
For a conviction of aggravated burglary, the state must prove an "unauthorized entry," which is negated when the occupant grants voluntary and intelligent consent to enter, even if the entrant later commits a felony, provided the consent was not vitiated by fraud concerning identity.
Facts:
- On October 27, 1981, Wilmer D. Lockhart knocked on the unlocked door of Liby B. Carter's house in Minden, Louisiana.
- Ms. Carter, a woman in her sixties, responded to the knock by calling out "all right," which she testified meant "come on in."
- Ms. Carter recognized Lockhart as her distant cousin as he entered her home.
- Lockhart asked to use the bathroom, and Ms. Carter gave him permission, pointing in the appropriate direction.
- After exiting the bathroom, Lockhart entered Ms. Carter's bedroom, where she was changing the diaper of a baby she was babysitting.
- Lockhart then grabbed Ms. Carter from the rear, exposed his penis, attempted to throw her onto the bed, pulled up her dress, and attempted penetration while making threats.
- The two struggled, and Lockhart threw Ms. Carter to the floor, struggling on top of her with his penis touching her lower stomach before getting up to leave.
- Lockhart told Ms. Carter to give him "two hours to get out of town" before she called the police.
Procedural Posture:
- Wilmer D. Lockhart was charged by bill of information with the crime of aggravated burglary in violation of La.R.S. 14:60.
- He was tried by jury in a Louisiana trial court and found guilty as charged.
- Lockhart's motion for a new trial was denied by the trial court.
- The trial court sentenced Lockhart as a multiple offender to twenty years at hard labor.
- Lockhart appealed his conviction and sentence to the Supreme Court of Louisiana, urging one assignment of error regarding the insufficiency of evidence (Lockhart being the appellant, and the State of Louisiana the appellee).
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 sufficient evidence exist to prove the "unauthorized entry" element of aggravated burglary when a victim voluntarily allows a recognized individual into her home, even if that individual subsequently commits a felony?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Calogero
No, sufficient evidence does not exist to prove the "unauthorized entry" element of aggravated burglary when a victim voluntarily allows a recognized individual into her home, even if that individual subsequently commits a felony. The court reasoned that Ms. Carter explicitly consented to Lockhart's entry by saying "all right," which she clarified meant "come on in." She recognized him as her distant cousin, and her consent was voluntary and intelligent, based on a reasonable understanding of his identity. The court distinguished this case from State v. Lozier, where entry was gained through misrepresentation of identity, noting that Ms. Carter's consent was not vitiated by similar fraud. Therefore, Lockhart's entry was authorized. The State failed to prove the distinct element of "unauthorized entry" required by La. R.S. 14:60, as established in State v. Dunn, which states that an entry with the owner's express or implied consent is not unauthorized. Applying the Jackson v. Virginia standard for sufficiency of evidence, the court found that no rational trier of fact could have found that the requisite element of unauthorized entry was proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
Dissenting - Justice Watson
Justice Watson dissented without providing written reasons in the published opinion.
Analysis:
This case is significant because it strictly defines and applies the "unauthorized entry" element of burglary statutes, clarifying that initial consensual entry, even when followed by criminal acts, prevents a burglary conviction unless the consent itself was fraudulently obtained by misrepresenting identity. It emphasizes that while the intent to commit a felony must exist at the moment of entry, the entry itself must be unauthorized and distinct from that intent. This distinction guides prosecutors to pursue other charges, such as assault, battery, or attempted rape, when a person is initially invited into a home and subsequently commits a crime, rather than charges for burglary.
