People v. Toomes
Before: Shinn, Vallée
Opinion
148 Cal.App.2d 465 (1957) THE PEOPLE, Appellant,
v.
JOHN H. TOOMES et al., Respondents.
Crim. No. 5780. California Court of Appeals. Second Dist., Div. Three.
Feb. 11, 1957. Edmund G. Brown, Attorney General, William E. James, Deputy Attorney General, William B. McKesson, District Attorney (Los Angeles), Jere J. Sullivan, Lewis Watnick and Fred N. Whichello, Deputy District Attorneys, for Appellant.
Ellery E. Cuff, Public Defender (Los Angeles), and Richard W. Erskine, Deputy Public Defender, for Respondents.
SHINN, P. J.
John H. Toomes and Philander Smith were accused of burglary and upon the preliminary hearing were committed for trial. They made a motion to set aside the information under section 995 of the Penal Code upon the ground that they had been committed without reasonable or probable cause. The motion was granted and the People appeal.
The evidence at the preliminary hearing established the following facts: Harry Bergerson parked his automobile on the street. He closed the windows and locked the doors. The trunk was locked. Defendants drove up in a car, parked alongside, opened the trunk with a tire iron rim and screw driver and took therefrom a spare tire mounted on a rim. [466] They were later apprehended with the rim and tire in question, and two others, in the trunk of their car and were placed under arrest.
[1] The question on appeal is whether the defendants were guilty of burglary or only of theft. Section 459 of the Penal Code provides in part: "Every person who enters any ... vehicle as defined by said code when the doors of such vehicle are locked ... with intent to commit grand or petit larceny or any felony is guilty of burglary." An automobile is such a vehicle. (Veh. Code, 31.) It is the contention of defendants, which prevailed in the trial court, that the words, "the doors of such vehicle are locked" refer only to the side doors of an automobile and cannot reasonably be understood as including the cover of the trunk. Therefore, they argue that in order to constitute burglary there must be an unlawful entry into the section of the car that is entered through the side doors. They concede that if the lid or cover of a trunk is one of the doors of the vehicle within the meaning of section 459, and is locked, an entry into the trunk compartment for the purpose of committing a theft would constitute burglary. "Door" is defined in Webster's New International Dictionary, Second Edition, Unabridged: "1. The movable frame or barrier of boards, or other material, usually turning on hinges or pivots or sliding, by which an entranceway into a house or apartment is closed and opened; also, a similar part of a piece of furniture, as in a cabinet or bookcase. 2. An opening in the wall of a house or of an apartment, by which to go in and out; an entranceway; a doorway. 3. Passage; means of approach or access."
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)