Legal Opinion

Bailey v. State

Supreme Court of Delaware

Decided July 26, 1967PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HERRMANN, Justice.

This appeal requires interpretation of the word “enter” as used in 11 Del.C. § 395, making it an offense to “break and enter” a building with intent to commit a crime therein. The word is defined by the Statute [11 Del.C. § 391(d)] as follows:

“(d) Enter. The word ‘enter’, as used in this section, includes the entrance of the offender into such building or apartment, or the insertion therein of any part of his body or of any instrument or weapon held in his hand, and used, or intended to be used, to threaten or intimidate the inmates, or to detach or remove property.”

• The…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State v. BiterSuperior Court of Delaware · 1955
  2. State v. O'LEARYNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1954
  3. Mattox v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1913
  4. State v. GrubaughNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1950

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. State v. TixierNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1976
  2. United States v. David BrownCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2020
  3. Samuels v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 1969
  4. Wintjen v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 1979
  5. Miller v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 1973

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API