Villalobos

People v. Villalobos

Good Law
145 Cal. App. 4th 310·2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 1892·2006 Daily Journal DAR 15633·51 Cal. Rptr. 3d 678·2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 10959
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 30, 2006E038143California4,667 words

Opinion

Opinion

McKINSTER, J.

Defendants appeal their convictions for first degree robbery and burglary, as well as an enhancement imposed for commission of a home invasion robbery committed in association with, for the benefit of or at the direction of a criminal street gang. They contend that an occupied motel room, such as that where these crimes took place, is not an “inhabited dwelling house” within the meaning of the relevant statutes, if the room is rented only for one night.

Burglary is historically a crime against habitation. In most instances, a hotel or motel room is rented for purposes of habitation, albeit on a temporary basis. We will therefore hold that a hotel or motel room that is currently rented as a temporary habitation is an inhabited dwelling for purposes of first degree robbery and burglary, regardless of the length of time for which the room is rented.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Brandon Villalobos and Bernadette Maria Osika (hereafter referred to either by their respective last names or collectively as defendants) were tried jointly but to separate juries on charges arising from an incident at the Peppertree Motel in Ontario. Both defendants were convicted of first degree burglary…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.