In Re Young K.

People v. Young K.

Good Law
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 905·49 Cal. App. 4th 861·57 Cal. Rptr. 2d 12·96 Daily Journal DAR 11835·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7197
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 25, 1996B100703California1,085 words

Opinion

Opinion

Vogel, J.

J(1) Young K. drove the get-away car for two friends who removed the headlights from a parked car. This resulted in a petition alleging that Young had committed vehicular burglary (Pen. Code, § 459), receiving stolen property (§ 496, subd. (a)), and misdemeanor auto tampering (Veh. Code, § 10852). The petition was sustained and Young appeals, contending that “entry into the headlamp housings of an automobile to steal its headlamps” is not an “entry into a vehicle” within the meaning of section 459. We agree.

Discussion

As relevant, section 459 provides that “[e]very person who enters any . . . vehicle. . . when the doors are locked. . . with [the] intent to commit grand or petit larceny or any felony is guilty of burglary.” (Italics added.) Under existing case law, an entry within the meaning of section 459 includes just about any entry into an interior section of a locked vehicle with the requisite intent, including an entry through a door, window, or trunk. (People v. Malcolm (1975) 47 Cal.App.3d 217 [ 120 Cal.Rptr. 667 ] [closed wind-wing section of window of locked car]; People v. Blalock (1971) 20 Cal.App.3d 1078 [ 98 Cal.Rptr. 231 ] [locked trunk]; People v.…

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.