In Re Amber S.

In this case we hold that an “open pole bam” without walls is not a building within the scope of California’s burglary statute.

Amber S. and an accomplice were caught in the act of stealing some 30 bales of hay from a structure described by the owner as an “open pole bam.” The structure was open on all sides, consisting of a roof and overhang held up by poles. Amber was charged with burglary (Pen. Code, § 459), and a referee found the allegation to be true. The referee adjudged Amber a ward of the court and placed her on probation.

Amber correctly contends the structure at issue is not within the scope of Penal Code section 459, which applies to “any house, room, apartment, tenement, shop, warehouse, store, mill, bam, stable, outhouse or other building” and certain enumerated nonbuildings not relevant here. It has long been the rule that a “building” within the meaning of California’s burglary statute “is any structure which has walls on all sides and is covered by a roof.” (People v. Stickman (1867) 34 Cal. 242, 245 ; accord, People v. Gibbons (1928) 206 Cal. 112, 114 [ 273 P. 32 ]; People v. Brooks (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 200, 204 [ 183 Cal.Rptr. 773 ]; People v. Coffee…