Winters v. State
41 Ark. App. 104, 848 S.W.2d 441, 1993 Ark. App. LEXIS 150 (1993)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A structure that is functionally interconnected with and immediately contiguous to a main business building is considered an 'occupiable structure' for the purposes of the burglary statute, even if it is not accessible from inside the main building.
Facts:
- On the evening of February 17, 1991, Purvis DeWayne Carr observed a tan pickup truck, matching the appellant's, driving slowly while carrying four new Armstrong rice and cane farm tires in its bed.
- That same night, Bay Police Chief Kenneth Walker noticed a set of tire tracks leading to a large storage building at the Craighead Farmers Co-op during his patrol.
- The following morning, February 18, 1991, Co-op branch manager Jim Wyse discovered that a locked gate on an attached supply room had been forcibly removed.
- Wyse determined that several large tractor tires and wheels, including Armstrong rice and cane tires valued at approximately $4,000, were missing from the supply room and another storage building.
- When questioned by police, the appellant, whose truck matched the description, gave conflicting statements, first denying he ever dealt in tractor tires and then claiming he regularly hauled them for his father.
- The appellant later confessed to an acquaintance, Brenda Ratliff, stating he 'did what they said I did' and asked her to provide a false alibi for him.
- The appellant and his associate also asked another witness, Sandy Jones, to provide a false alibi, later threatening her and offering her money to 'keep her mouth shut' when she decided to tell the truth.
Procedural Posture:
- The appellant was charged with burglary and theft of property in an Arkansas trial court.
- A jury convicted the appellant on both counts.
- The trial court sentenced the appellant to fifteen years for each count, to be served consecutively for a total of thirty years.
- The appellant appealed his conviction and sentence to the Arkansas Court of Appeals.
- On appeal, the appellant contended that the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction and that the trial court erred in not finding that the entered buildings were not 'occupiable structures' under the burglary statute.
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 supply room that is attached to a main business warehouse, but lacks an internal connecting door, qualify as an 'occupiable structure' under the Arkansas burglary statute?
Opinions:
Majority - James R. Cooper
Yes. A supply room attached to a main business warehouse qualifies as an 'occupiable structure' under the burglary statute, even if it lacks an internal connecting door. The Arkansas burglary statute defines an 'occupiable structure' as a place where a person 'carries on a business.' The court reasoned that the supply room, though not accessible from inside the main warehouse, was functionally interconnected with and immediately contiguous to the business. Employees entered it as needed during the normal course of business, making it an integral part of the business premises. The court found that 'simple logic would suffer' if the lack of an internal door was a determinative factor, analogizing the situation to an attached body shop at an auto dealership. The court also held that the circumstantial evidence—including the identification of the appellant's truck, his conflicting statements, his confession to an acquaintance, and his attempts to procure a false alibi—was substantial enough to support the convictions for burglary and theft.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies the scope of an 'occupiable structure' under Arkansas's burglary statute, particularly in a commercial context. By focusing on the functional relationship of a structure to the business rather than its specific architectural features, the court closed a potential loophole for defendants. This precedent makes it easier to prosecute burglaries of attached storage units, annexes, or other outbuildings that are integral to a business's operations. The ruling emphasizes that as long as a space is part of where a business is 'carried on,' it is protected by the burglary statute, regardless of whether it has an internal entrance.
