Glazier

People v. Glazier

Bad Law
113 Cal. Rptr. 3d 108·186 Cal. App. 4th 1151·2010 Cal. App. LEXIS 1195
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 19, 2010B214200California3,120 words

Opinion

Opinion

Klein, J.

Defendant and appellant, Gary Glazier, appeals his conviction of first degree attempted burglary (Pen. Code, §§ 459, 664). Glazier used a paint sprayer filled with gasoline and a 20-foot-long torch to set fire to his neighbor’s house while he remained on his own property. Glazier claims he should not have been convicted of attempted burglary under the burglary-by-instrument doctrine.

We disagree. As interpreted by case law, the limitations on the burglary-by-instrument doctrine have no application in this situation. Glazier’s conduct fell within the parameters of the doctrine. Therefore, substantial evidence supports his attempted burglary conviction under the burglary-by-instrument doctrine. The judgment is affirmed.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

1. Glazier’s charged offenses.

On November 26, 2007, Glazier was accused, in an indictment returned in the Los Angeles Superior Court, of arson and related charges. The court dismissed several charges upon the defense’s motions. The resulting accusatory pleading charged Glazier with arson of an inhabited structure or property (count 1; § 451, subd. (b)), attempted first degree burglary (count 2; §§ 459, 664), and…

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.