Magness v. Superior Court
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
LIU, J.
We granted review to decide whether a person standing in the driveway of a residence who uses a remote control to open a motorized garage door has entered the residence within the meaning of the burglary statute. For the reasons that follow, we hold that using a remote control to open a garage door does not constitute an entry into the residence. On these facts, defendant may be charged with attempted burglary, but he cannot be charged with a completed burglary.
I
Defendant Christopher Magness was charged in a felony complaint with attempted first degree burglary of an inhabited…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- People v. GauzeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
- People v. BarryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- People v. DavisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
- People v. NibleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
- People v. ValenciaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- People v. YarbroughCalifornia Supreme Court · 2012
- People v. LujanoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
- People v. Bedolla, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- Yohner v. California Department of JusticeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
- United States v. MaldonadoCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2012
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.