 |
 |
 |
| |
|
|
People v Dupree
Author:- Sam
Biers
Facts:Respondent, on appeal to the Michigan Supreme Court, was convicted of burglary after he visited the owner of a shop and allegedly rigged the window so that it could not be secured 100% and three pairs of shoes were stolen from within.
Issue:Without a showing of physical damage or disturbance was the jury properly instructed on the elements to support a charge of burglary?
Holding: The character of the offense remains unchanged and the defendant was properly found guilty of burglary.
Court Rationale: Merely because the respondent caused the window to remain unsecured supports the breaking requirement of burglary. The respondent possessed the intent to commit felonious actions, broke into the owners building, without the owner’s consent, therefor he is guilty of burglary.