You might intend to commit a felony while inside the vehicle, steal something inside the car, or steal the car itself. Regardless of your exact intentions, you have to enter the car through force for the crime to qualify as an auto burglary.
Burglary is most commonly used to refer to breaking into a house or business. However, according to California law, breaking into a car also counts as long as the person intended to commit a crime in the vehicle. One of the most frequent examples is when a car window is smashed so that a computer, phone, or other expensive electronic can be stolen. If you break into a car trunk, that counts as burglary as well, even if the trunk is separated from the cab of the vehicle.
California describes vehicles as any devices that propel someone. Most commonly, this includes trucks, motorcycles, and cars.
For an auto burglary charge to stick, the prosecutor must present evidence of forced entry. That means that if a person simply opened an unlocked car to steal something inside, they might not be charged with burglary. However, they are still subject to charges related to the theft or crime committed in the vehicle.
Auto burglary is a second-degree form of burglary. Depending on the severity of the circumstances, it might be charged in California court as a felony or misdemeanor. With a misdemeanor, you might face up to one year in jail. With a felony, you could face up to 3 years in jail.
Conviction can lead to serious legal issues. You should contact an attorney immediately if you’re accused of this crime.
Definition of the Crime
The definition of the crime can be found in Section 459 of California’s penal code. It says that entering a locked vehicle with an intent to commit a felony or larceny is burglary.
There are two key factors that make up this crime. One is the vehicle being locked instead of unlocked, so force is needed to open the doors or smash the windows. The other is intending to commit a crime inside the vehicle, whether you actually successfully commit that crime or not.
If you break into a locked car without planning to commit a crime, you could still be brought up on criminal charges. But burglary won’t be one of them. Similarly, if you open an unlocked car and steal something inside, you can be charged with theft. But you can’t be charged with burglary.
This is a highly specific crime, and the prosecutor needs to prove that you meet the definition.
Defending Against the Charges
A defense lawyer can review the facts of your case and create a defense strategy based on the situation. There are several different legal strategies that lawyers might use. Keep in mind that the prosecutor must prove that the defendant committed every element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.
One defense is to show that the defendant didn’t intend to commit a felony or steal anything inside the car. The prosecutor has to prove that your intention was to steal something or commit a crime. If they can’t do that, your lawyer can poke holes in their case. All that needs to be shown is a reasonable doubt that you intended to cause harm.
Another defense is if the vehicle was unlocked. To be convicted of auto burglary, you have to force entry into a locked car. You can still be prosecuted for theft if you steal something from an unlocked car, but you haven’t technically committed the crime of forced entry.
The prosecutor therefore needs to prove that the vehicle was locked and that you forced entry. If they don’t have any evidence indicating this, then auto burglary doesn’t work as a charge. If the prosecutor is unable to prove this, you may be able to have your charges lessened or have them dropped.
The last most common defense used is the one about insufficient evidence. The prosecutor needs to have hard evidence that the defendant is the one who committed the crime. If they can’t prove that, then the defendant must be let go. A defense lawyer might be able to find holes in the prosecutor’s story, and they can also challenge the accuracy of the evidence. They will need to point out any logical fallacies with regards to what the evidence “proves.”
