 |
 |
 |
| |
|
|
Hebron v Maryland
Author:- Sam
Biers
Facts: Appellant Hebron was convicted by Jury for breaking and entering, attempted breaking and entering, and malicious destruction of property. Defendant dislodged the doorjam and door to Dr. Weiner’s home which caused the door to become splintering and broken apart.
Issue: Was the evidence legally insufficient to support a conviction for breaking and entering?
Holding: Defendant does not refute that a breaking occurred. Defendant denies that prosecution proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he entered. Defendant’s body crossed the line of threshold in order to cause the doorway to break, as witnesses placed him at the scene and with that defendant caused breaking and entering.
Court Rationale: The witness placed the Defendant at the scene around 11 a.m. and heard an audible noise “Not a pop bang, but a bash bang.” Then saw the defendant drive away.It is reasonable to infer that the defendant caused the crashing of the door, and therefor it is also reasonable to infer that some portion of the defendant’s body crossed the line of threshold to accomplish that end.