Court of Appeals — Burglary: People v. Cajigas

Daily Record Staff//November 1, 2012//

Listen to this article

Intent — Violation of Order of Protection

People v. Cajigas
No. 167
Judge Graffeo

Background: The defendant was subject to an order of protection requiring him to keep from any contact with his ex-paramour. After the defendant had tried to enter her apartment and speak with the victim’s daughter, he was indicted for attempted burglary. The defense counsel argued that the violation of the order of protection could not be used to prove two elements of the burglary. Specifically, the intent element could not be satisfied by intended conduct that would be innocuous if the order of protection did not prohibit it.

Ruling: The Court of Appeals held that the trial court had properly instructed the jury that the mens rea element of burglary would be satisfied if the jury found that the defendant intended to engage in some of the conduct prohibited by the order of protection.

Jonathan M. Kirschbaum for the appellant; Britta Gilmore for the respondent

Select Region or Brand

Upcoming Event