People v. Davis CA4/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 26, 2016D068558California1,910 words

Opinion

Opinion

Huffman, J.

facts presented at the preliminary hearing show the losses for count 1 are approximately

$1,800. Thus Davis does not challenge the denial of reduction of count 1. Davis does

contend that as to count 3, the amount of the loss appearing to be less than $950, the court

erred in denying his challenge to the burglary count.

We will find the locked academic offices on the UCSD campus do not qualify as

commercial establishments under section 459.5. Therefore, we will affirm the judgment.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The facts of the offenses are only relevant to the extent they illuminate the amount

of the loss, and the nature of the offices involved. The parties do not dispute the facts.

As a matter of convenience we will adopt the statement of facts from the respondent's

brief as an accurate summary.

On January 26, 2015 at approximately 5 :36 p.m., Claudia Pena was in her third

floor office at the Calit building at UCSD when she observed an African-American male,

identified as appellant, walk by her office window multiple times. When Pena exited her

office to investigate, she heard what sounded like the opening and closing of drawers and

cabinets. Pena called the…

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.