NO. 12448
I N THE SUPREME COURT O THE STATE OF M N A A F OTN
STATE OF MONTANA,
P l a i n t i f f and Respondent,
-vs -
GEORGE SOLIS,
Defendant and A p p e l l a n t .
Appeal from: D i s t r i c t C o u r t of t h e S i x t e e n t h J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , Hon. A. B . M a r t i n , Judge p r e s i d i n g .
Counsel o f Record:
For Appellant :
Reno and Dolve, B i l l i n g s , Montana James A. Reno a r g u e d , B i l l i n g s , Montana
F o r Respondent :
Hon. R o b e r t L. Woodahl , A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l , H e l e n a , Montana J. C . Weingartner, A s s i s t a n t Attorney General, argued, Helena, Montana W i l l i a m J. K r u t z f e l d t , County A t t o r n e y , a p p e a r e d , M i l e s C i t y , Montana K e i t h Haker a r g u e d , Miles C i t y , Montana
Submitted: September 26, 1973 M r . J u s t i c e Gene B. Daly d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion o f t h e Court.
Defendant George S o l i s a p p e a l s from h i s c o n v i c t i o n of f i r s t degree b u r g l a r y e n t e r e d i n t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t of C u s t e r County. On September 22, 1972, two young women came t o t h e home of Frank M o r r e l l e i n Miles C i t y , Montana, t o i n q u i r e about an apartment he had o f f e r e d f o r r e n t . One of t h e women, Irma Jean Hoops, was l a t e r i d e n t i f i e d a s t h e g i r l f r i e n d of defendant Solis. Morrelle loaned t h e women some money f o r food which he obtained from h i s basement s a f e i n t h e i r presence. Some keys and a r i n g belonging t o M o r r e l l e disappeared about t h e time of t h e g i r l s ' v i s i t . He r e p o r t e d t h e missing items t o t h e p o l i c e and changed t h e door l o c k s corresponding t o t h e missing keys. The missing r i n g was found i n d e f e n d a n t ' s possession when he was apprehended i n connection w i t h t h e b u r g l a r y . On September 24, 1972, Frank M o r r e l l e , r e t u r n i n g t o h i s home a t about 9:20 p.m., n o t i c e d a l i g h t i n h i s basement. Morrelle became s u s p i c i o u s , went t o t h e home of David Whitney, h i s n e x t door neighbor, and asked Whitney t o phone t h e p o l i c e . A f t e r doing s o , Whitney went o u t s i d e and observed defendant on f o o t l e a v i n g ~ o r r e l l e ' sproperty. h?hitney f i r s t c a l l e d t o defendant, t h e n pursued him. Whitney t e s t i f i e d t h a t defendant stopped and "pulled a p i s t o l o r something o u t of h i s pocket and pointed i t towards me." Defendant was a r r e s t e d about an hour l a t e r by t h e C u s t e r County deputy s h e r i f f a t t h e Flaming Arrow Motel i n Miles C i t y . The deputy s h e r i f f and o t h e r law enforcement o f f i c e r s p r e s e n t t e s t i f i e d t h a t when a r r e s t e d defendant appeared sweat-soaked and exhausted a s though he had been running. David Whitney p o s t i v e l y i d e n t i f i e d defendant a s t h e man he had pursued from t h e M o r r e l l e r e s i d e n c e e a r l i e r i n t h e evening. Witnesses t e s t i f i e d ~ o r r e l l e ' ss a f e had been overturned and tampered w i t h b u t t h e b u r g l a r had f a i l e d t o open t h e s a f e when he l e f t t h e scene, l e a v i n g h i s t o o l s behind. O appeal defendant p r e s e n t s two i s s u e s f o r review: n
(1) Did t h e evidence support t h e j u r y v e r d i c t of f i r s t degree b u r g l a r y , s p e c i f i c a l l y w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e "nighttime r e - quirement "?
(2) Did t h e t r i a l c o u r t e r r i n r e f u s i n g t o g i v e de- f e n d a n t ' s o f f e r e d i n s t r u c t i o n s numbered 1, 4 , 6 and 7? I s s u e (1). S e c t i o n 94-901, R.C.M. 1947, provides: 11 Every person who e n t e r s any house *** w i t h i n t e n t t o commit grand o r p e t i t e l a r c e n y o r any f e l o n y , i s g u i l t y of b u r g l a r y . " The f a c t t h a t t h e s a f e opening had n o t been completed and n o t h i n g had been taken from t h e M o r r e l l e home does n o t preclude c o n v i c t i o n of b u r g l a r y . Morigeau v. S t a t e , 149 Mont. 85, 423 P.2d 60. S e c t i o n 94-902, R.C.M. 1947, p r o v i d e s : Every b u r g l a r y committed i n t h e n i g h t t i m e i s II
b u r g l a r y i n t h e f i r s t degree and every b u r g l a r y committed i n t h e daytime i s b u r g l a r y i n t h e second degree. I I This Court i n S t a t e v. Copenhaver, 35 Mont. 342, 89 P. 61, and i n S t a t e v. F i t z p a t r i c k , 125 Mont. 448, 239 P.2d 529, e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t f i r s t and second degree b u r g l a r y a r e s e p a r a t e o f f e n s e s d i f - f e r e n t i a t e d by t h e n i g h t t i m e requirement which e x i s t s a s an essen- t i a l element of f i r s t degree b u r g l a r y only. Commission of a b u r g l a r y i s p r e d i c a t e d upon t h e "entry" with the r e q u i s i t e felonious intent. Hence, t h e b u r g l a r y occurs a t t h e time of t h e e n t r y upon t h e premises. S t a t e v. H a r r i s , Mont . , 498 P.2d 1222, 29 St.Rep. 498; S t a t e v. Board, 135 Mont. 139, 337 P.2d 924; S t a t e v. Moran, 142 Mont. 423, 384 P.2d 777. The "nighttime e n t r y " i s s u e i n t h e i n s t a n t c a s e i s analogous t o S t a t e v. Board, supra. I n Board, t h e defendant was discovered p i l f e r i n g a motel room a t about 4:00 a.m. - N d i r e c t evidence was o e v e r introduced t o e s t a b l i s h t h e time of e n t r y . I n t h e c a s e s c i t e d , t h e r u l e i n F i t z p- r i c k i s followed. a- t I n - p a t r i c k , t h e r e was - evidence of t h e commission of t h e Fitz no b u r g l a r y i n t h e n i g h t t i m e , much l e s s t h e e n t r y . I n t h e c a s e s which
- followed F i t z p a t r i c k , and i n p a r t i c u l a r Board, t h e b u r g l a r y was e s t a b l i s h e d a s o c c u r r i n g d u r i n g t h e n i g h t t i m e and e n t r y was of n e c e s s i t y submitted t o t h e j u r y on c i r c u m s t a n t i a l evidence. I n t h e i n s t a n t c a s e , defendant was f l u s h e d i n t h e n i g h t - time a t about 9:20 p.m., September 24, some hours a f t e r darkness a t t h a t time of y e a r . Only p r e l i m i n a r y work toward opening t h e s a f e had been completed and among t h e t o o l s l e f t behind was a flashlight. I t seems r e a s o n a b l e t h e j u r y could conclude t h a t a b u r g l a r would proceed w i t h d i l i g e n c e t o t h e t a s k a t hand and would n o t r e q u i r e a f l a s h l i g h t i n t h e d a y l i g h t hours. Examination of t h e t r i a l r e c o r d d i s c l o s e s t h e j u r y was i n s t r u c t e d i n c o u r t ' s i n s t r u c t i o n s number 2 and 8 t h a t commission i n t h e n i g h t t i m e i s an element of f i r s t degree b u r g l a r y . Instruc- t i o n number 2 s t a t e d t h e requirement t h a t every f a c t o r element n e c e s s a r y t o c o n s t i t u t e t h e crime charged must b e proved beyond a r e a s o n a b l e doubt. C o u r t ' s i n s t r u c t i o n number 1 s t a t e d t h e de- 1 fendant could n o t be convicted on c o n j e c t u r e , s u s p i c i o n o r p r o b a b i l i t y , b u t only upon proof such a s t o l o g i c a l l y compel t h e c o n v i c t i o n t h a t t h e charge was t r u e .
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
NO. 12448
I N THE SUPREME COURT O THE STATE OF M N A A F OTN
STATE OF MONTANA,
P l a i n t i f f and Respondent,
-vs -
GEORGE SOLIS,
Defendant and A p p e l l a n t .
Appeal from: D i s t r i c t C o u r t of t h e S i x t e e n t h J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , Hon. A. B . M a r t i n , Judge p r e s i d i n g .
Counsel o f Record:
For Appellant :
Reno and Dolve, B i l l i n g s , Montana James A. Reno a r g u e d , B i l l i n g s , Montana
F o r Respondent :
Hon. R o b e r t L. Woodahl , A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l , H e l e n a , Montana J. C . Weingartner, A s s i s t a n t Attorney General, argued, Helena, Montana W i l l i a m J. K r u t z f e l d t , County A t t o r n e y , a p p e a r e d , M i l e s C i t y , Montana K e i t h Haker a r g u e d , Miles C i t y , Montana
Submitted: September 26, 1973 M r . J u s t i c e Gene B. Daly d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion o f t h e Court.
Defendant George S o l i s a p p e a l s from h i s c o n v i c t i o n of f i r s t degree b u r g l a r y e n t e r e d i n t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t of C u s t e r County. On September 22, 1972, two young women came t o t h e home of Frank M o r r e l l e i n Miles C i t y , Montana, t o i n q u i r e about an apartment he had o f f e r e d f o r r e n t . One of t h e women, Irma Jean Hoops, was l a t e r i d e n t i f i e d a s t h e g i r l f r i e n d of defendant Solis. Morrelle loaned t h e women some money f o r food which he obtained from h i s basement s a f e i n t h e i r presence. Some keys and a r i n g belonging t o M o r r e l l e disappeared about t h e time of t h e g i r l s ' v i s i t . He r e p o r t e d t h e missing items t o t h e p o l i c e and changed t h e door l o c k s corresponding t o t h e missing keys. The missing r i n g was found i n d e f e n d a n t ' s possession when he was apprehended i n connection w i t h t h e b u r g l a r y . On September 24, 1972, Frank M o r r e l l e , r e t u r n i n g t o h i s home a t about 9:20 p.m., n o t i c e d a l i g h t i n h i s basement. Morrelle became s u s p i c i o u s , went t o t h e home of David Whitney, h i s n e x t door neighbor, and asked Whitney t o phone t h e p o l i c e . A f t e r doing s o , Whitney went o u t s i d e and observed defendant on f o o t l e a v i n g ~ o r r e l l e ' sproperty. h?hitney f i r s t c a l l e d t o defendant, t h e n pursued him. Whitney t e s t i f i e d t h a t defendant stopped and "pulled a p i s t o l o r something o u t of h i s pocket and pointed i t towards me." Defendant was a r r e s t e d about an hour l a t e r by t h e C u s t e r County deputy s h e r i f f a t t h e Flaming Arrow Motel i n Miles C i t y . The deputy s h e r i f f and o t h e r law enforcement o f f i c e r s p r e s e n t t e s t i f i e d t h a t when a r r e s t e d defendant appeared sweat-soaked and exhausted a s though he had been running. David Whitney p o s t i v e l y i d e n t i f i e d defendant a s t h e man he had pursued from t h e M o r r e l l e r e s i d e n c e e a r l i e r i n t h e evening. Witnesses t e s t i f i e d ~ o r r e l l e ' ss a f e had been overturned and tampered w i t h b u t t h e b u r g l a r had f a i l e d t o open t h e s a f e when he l e f t t h e scene, l e a v i n g h i s t o o l s behind. O appeal defendant p r e s e n t s two i s s u e s f o r review: n
(1) Did t h e evidence support t h e j u r y v e r d i c t of f i r s t degree b u r g l a r y , s p e c i f i c a l l y w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e "nighttime r e - quirement "?
(2) Did t h e t r i a l c o u r t e r r i n r e f u s i n g t o g i v e de- f e n d a n t ' s o f f e r e d i n s t r u c t i o n s numbered 1, 4 , 6 and 7? I s s u e (1). S e c t i o n 94-901, R.C.M. 1947, provides: 11 Every person who e n t e r s any house *** w i t h i n t e n t t o commit grand o r p e t i t e l a r c e n y o r any f e l o n y , i s g u i l t y of b u r g l a r y . " The f a c t t h a t t h e s a f e opening had n o t been completed and n o t h i n g had been taken from t h e M o r r e l l e home does n o t preclude c o n v i c t i o n of b u r g l a r y . Morigeau v. S t a t e , 149 Mont. 85, 423 P.2d 60. S e c t i o n 94-902, R.C.M. 1947, p r o v i d e s : Every b u r g l a r y committed i n t h e n i g h t t i m e i s II
b u r g l a r y i n t h e f i r s t degree and every b u r g l a r y committed i n t h e daytime i s b u r g l a r y i n t h e second degree. I I This Court i n S t a t e v. Copenhaver, 35 Mont. 342, 89 P. 61, and i n S t a t e v. F i t z p a t r i c k , 125 Mont. 448, 239 P.2d 529, e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t f i r s t and second degree b u r g l a r y a r e s e p a r a t e o f f e n s e s d i f - f e r e n t i a t e d by t h e n i g h t t i m e requirement which e x i s t s a s an essen- t i a l element of f i r s t degree b u r g l a r y only. Commission of a b u r g l a r y i s p r e d i c a t e d upon t h e "entry" with the r e q u i s i t e felonious intent. Hence, t h e b u r g l a r y occurs a t t h e time of t h e e n t r y upon t h e premises. S t a t e v. H a r r i s , Mont . , 498 P.2d 1222, 29 St.Rep. 498; S t a t e v. Board, 135 Mont. 139, 337 P.2d 924; S t a t e v. Moran, 142 Mont. 423, 384 P.2d 777. The "nighttime e n t r y " i s s u e i n t h e i n s t a n t c a s e i s analogous t o S t a t e v. Board, supra. I n Board, t h e defendant was discovered p i l f e r i n g a motel room a t about 4:00 a.m. - N d i r e c t evidence was o e v e r introduced t o e s t a b l i s h t h e time of e n t r y . I n t h e c a s e s c i t e d , t h e r u l e i n F i t z p- r i c k i s followed. a- t I n - p a t r i c k , t h e r e was - evidence of t h e commission of t h e Fitz no b u r g l a r y i n t h e n i g h t t i m e , much l e s s t h e e n t r y . I n t h e c a s e s which
- followed F i t z p a t r i c k , and i n p a r t i c u l a r Board, t h e b u r g l a r y was e s t a b l i s h e d a s o c c u r r i n g d u r i n g t h e n i g h t t i m e and e n t r y was of n e c e s s i t y submitted t o t h e j u r y on c i r c u m s t a n t i a l evidence. I n t h e i n s t a n t c a s e , defendant was f l u s h e d i n t h e n i g h t - time a t about 9:20 p.m., September 24, some hours a f t e r darkness a t t h a t time of y e a r . Only p r e l i m i n a r y work toward opening t h e s a f e had been completed and among t h e t o o l s l e f t behind was a flashlight. I t seems r e a s o n a b l e t h e j u r y could conclude t h a t a b u r g l a r would proceed w i t h d i l i g e n c e t o t h e t a s k a t hand and would n o t r e q u i r e a f l a s h l i g h t i n t h e d a y l i g h t hours. Examination of t h e t r i a l r e c o r d d i s c l o s e s t h e j u r y was i n s t r u c t e d i n c o u r t ' s i n s t r u c t i o n s number 2 and 8 t h a t commission i n t h e n i g h t t i m e i s an element of f i r s t degree b u r g l a r y . Instruc- t i o n number 2 s t a t e d t h e requirement t h a t every f a c t o r element n e c e s s a r y t o c o n s t i t u t e t h e crime charged must b e proved beyond a r e a s o n a b l e doubt. C o u r t ' s i n s t r u c t i o n number 1 s t a t e d t h e de- 1 fendant could n o t be convicted on c o n j e c t u r e , s u s p i c i o n o r p r o b a b i l i t y , b u t only upon proof such a s t o l o g i c a l l y compel t h e c o n v i c t i o n t h a t t h e charge was t r u e . I n s t r u c t i o n number 12 d e f i n e d c i r c u m s t a n t i a l evidence a s evidence which proves a f a c t from which t h e i n f e r e n c e of a n o t h e r f a c t may be drawn. The j u r y was p r o p e r l y i n s t r u c t e d a s t o a l l t h e elements of t h e crime charged and a s t o t h e burden of proof. There was, con- s i d e r i n g a l l of t h e f a c t s and circumstances, s u f f i c i e n t d i r e c t and c i r c u m s t a n t i a l evidence t o support t h e j u r y ' s v e r d i c t . I s s u e 12). Did t h e t r i a l c o u r t e r r i n r e f u s i n g d e f e n d a n t ' s o f f e r e d i n s t r u c t i o n s numbered 1, 4 , 6 and 7 ? Proposed i n s t r u c t i o n 1 was a d i r e c t e d v e r d i c t i n s t r u c t i o n . This i n s t r u c t i o n was p r o p e r l y r e f u s e d , a s was d e f e n d a n t ' s motion f o r d i s m i s s a l . Under Montana law i n a c r i m i n a l c a s e , a d i r e c t e d v e r d i c t i s given only where t h e s t a t e f a i l s t o prove i t s c a s e and t h e r e i s no evidence upon which a j u r y could b a s e a v e r d i c t of g u i l t y . S t a t e v. M e t c a l f , 153 Mont. 369, 457 P,2d 453; S t a t e v. Yoss, 146 Mont, 508, 409 P.2d 452. Defendant's proposed instructions numbered 4, 6 and 7 were repetitive of other instructions given by the trial court relating to the elements of first degree burglary and were properly refused. The judgment of the district court is affirmed. /
&. -2 ''d ; Justice I /
Chief Justice
Justices
Hon. ~ @ b ~c ~ i n n o h , L. ~ District Judge, sitting for Justice John Conway Harrison.