Title: STATE v SHANNON

State: montana

Issuer: Montana Supreme Court

Document:

No, 1330L I N T H E SUPREME COURT O F T H E STATE O F ' M O N T A N A 1976 T H E STATE OF M O N T A N A , P l a i n t i f f and Respondent, -vs - JOHN C , SHANNON, Defendant and Appellant. Appeal from: D i s t r i c t Court of t h e Fourth J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , Honorable Jack Green, Judge presiding. Counsel of Record : For Appellant: H i r s t and Dostal, Missoula, Montana John Dostal argued, Missoula, Montana For Respondent : Hon. Robert L. Woodahl, Attorney General, Helena, Montana John F. North argued, A s s i s t a n t Attorney General, Helena, Montana Robert L. Deschamps, 111, County Attorney, Missoula, Montana Edward McLean argued, Deputy County Attorney, Missoula, Montana For Amicus Curiae: John Connor, Missoula, Montana Submitted : September 1, 1976 Decided : BEP 2 0 1976 M r . J u s t i c e Wesley Castles delivered the Opinion of the Court. John C. Shannon appeals h i s conviction i n the d i s t r i c t court, Missoula County, on the criminal charge of burglary, a felony as specified i n section 94-6-204(1), R.C.M. 1947. Defendant was found g u i l t y of knowingly entering the t r a i l e r portion of a t r a c t o r - t r a i l e r owned by Arden Olsen Trucking of Kalispell, Montana, f o r the purpose of removing approximately 28 cases of beer. A t t r i a l , defendant admitted t h a t he and two friends entered the t r a i l e r and removed the beer. Defendant argues these f a c t s are i n s u f f i - c i e n t t o constitute the crime of burglary because a t r a i l e r attached t o a semi-truck i s not an "occupied structure" within the meaning of section 94-6-204(1), R.C.M. 1947, even though, as here, t h e t r a c t o r portion has a sleeper-cab i n which the operator may sleep. He further contends these a c t s complained o f , and admitted i n court, a r e s u f f i c i e n t t o sustain only a charge of criminal trespass t o vehicles under section 94-6-202, R.C.M. 1947 o r misdemeanor t h e f t under section 94-6-302(4), R.C.M. 1947. The d i s t r i c t court found the t r a c t o r - t r a i l e r was an I t occupied structure" and a vehicle within t h e definitions of section 94-2-lOl(35) and (65), R.C.M. 1947, and t h a t any entry thereto with i n t e n t t o commit t h e f t of the beer was burglary. Section 94-2-101(35), R.C.M. 1947, defines "occupied structure" "* * * any building, vehicle, o r other place suited f o r human occupancy o r night lodging of persons o r f o r carrying on business, whether o r not a person i s actually present. 9~ * *I1 (Emphasis supplied.) The annotation t o t h i s definition, Montana Criminal Code, 1973, Annotated, Montana Criminal Law Commission, Prof. William F. Crowley, p. 55, s t a t e s : "* * * It i s important t o note t h a t the structure need not be occupied t o be the subject of arson o r burglary--under t h i s d e f i n i t i o n the building need only be suited f o r human habitation." The t r a c t o r - t r a i l e r entered by defendant was a vehicle a s defined i n section 94-2-101(65), R.C.M. 1947, which s t a t e s : "'Vehicle' means any device f o r transportation by land, water o r a i r , o r mobile equipment with provision f o r transport of an operator." The Montana Criminal Code, 1973, Annotated, p. 86, notes: "* * * Included within t h i s d e f i n i t i o n a r e a l l those transportation devices defined by the Motor Vehicle Code (R.C.M. 1947, 532-2101) as vehicles, including automobiles, motorcycles, motor driven cycles, emer- gency vehicles, buses, bicycles, farm and construction equipment, plus numerous vehicles not included within the Motor Vehicle Code * * *.I1 The Motor Vehicle Code, section 32-2102(a), R.C.M. 1947, defines "Every device, i n , upon, or by which any person o r property i s o r may be transported o r drawn upon a highway * * *.I1 This d e f i n i t i o n d e f i n i t e l y includes the t r a . i l e r portion of the t r a c t o r - t r a i l e r entered by defendant and h i s associates. The primary gravamen of burglary a t common law, and under the Montana Criminal Code of 1973, R.C.M. 1947, T i t l e 94, i s "the t h r e a t t o person resulting from the wrongful i n t r u ~ i o n * * * I f . Montana Criminal Code, 1973, Annotated, p. 236. However, the d r a f t e r s of the 1973 criminal code a l s o included language expressly intended t o protect the structure o r vehicle u t i l i z e d f o r "carrying on business". Section 94-2-101(35), R.C.M. 1947. This burglary s t a t u t e was drafted with both intentions i n mind. Defendant argues t h a t t o so hold w i l l r e s u l t i n h i s convic- t i o n of a felony rather than t h e l e s s e r offense of criminal trespass t o vehicles, which under section 94-6-202, R.C.M. 1947, i s a m i s - demeanor offense o r of misdemeanor t h e f t under section 94-6-302(4), R.C.M. 1947. - 3 - * This Court i n S t a t e v. Richter, 152 Mont. 449, 451, 451 P. 2d 833, stated: "It cannot be argued t h a t the l e g i s l a t u r e does not have the power t o denominate t h i s type of offense a s a burglary i n order t o prevent the apparent e v i l of breaking i n t o a car. Manifestly, making the offense a felony would tend t o minimize the frequency of such unlawful acts. I n construing l e g i s l a t i v e i n t e n t , t h e courts of t h i s s t a t e construe criminal s t a t u t e s according t o the f a i r import of t h e i r terms with a view t o e f f e c t t h e i r object and promote justice. S t a t e v. Aldahl, 106 Mont. 390, 78 P.2d 935." It i s c l e a r the d r a f t e r s of the Montana Criminal Code of 1973, intended t o include such an offense a s committed by de- fendant, and admitted by him i n court, within the scope of section 94-6-204, R.C.M. 1947, Burglary. The conviction i n the d i s t r i c t court i s affirmed. W e Concur: / \,J Justices.