Dupree - part of the house and therefore not a...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Andrea Sims April 5, 2007 Criminal Law 1. Name of Case- People v. Dupree, Supreme Court of Michigan, 1893 2. Background- The defendant, Dupree was convicted of burglary after he was caught trying to sell three pairs of shoes that had been stolen from a shoe store. Dupree had eaten lunch at the home of the owners of the shoe store on October 6, and while there left one of the windows in the front of the adjoining store open, so that he could come back on the night of October 8 and steal the shoes. 3. Issue- Is the defendant guilty of burglary if he used a previously opened window to enter the store? Also, can the defendant be charged with burglary if the store was not a
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: part of the house, and therefore not a “dwelling”? 4. Applicable Law- Burglary is the unlawful entry into any structure, home, business, or otherwise, with the intent to commit any crime inside. No physical breaking and entering is required. 5. Result- The conviction was affirmed. 6. Reasoning- Because the defendant caused the window to remain open and unsecured, there is enough evidence to prove that he passed into the store without the owner’s consent with the intent to steal the shoes, and thus supporting the charge of burglary....
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online