Case Name: PEOPLE v. COLLINS
Court: Michigan Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 1969-12-08
Citations: 20 Mich. App. 571
Docket Number: Docket No. 6,930
Parties: PEOPLE v. COLLINS
Judges: Before: E. B. Burns, P. J., and Holbrook and V. J. Brennan, JJ.
Reporter: Michigan appeals reports; cases decided in the Michigan Court of Appeals.
Volume: 20
Pages: 571–572

Head Matter:
PEOPLE v. COLLINS
1. Burglary — Breaking and Entering —• Apartment — Occupied Dwelling.
“Occupied dwelling” as used in the statute defining the offense of breaking and entering an occupied dwelling ineludes any private apartment habitually used as a -place of abode.
2. Appeal and Error — Instructions to Jury — Preserving Question — Court Rules.
Claims of error in instructions to the jury not raised for consideration by the trial court may not be reviewed on appeal (OCR 1963, 516.2).
References for Points in Headnotes
13 Am Jur 2d, Burglary § 3 et seq.
What is a “building” or “house” within burglary statutes, 78 ALR2d 778.
5 Am Jur 2d, Appeal and Error § 891 et seq.
Appeal from Recorder’s Court of Detroit, Donald S. Leonard, J.
Submitted Division 1 December 3, 1969, at Detroit.
(Docket No. 6,930.)
Decided December 8, 1969.
Earlie Collins was convicted of breaking and entering of an occupied dwelling with tbe intent to commit larceny. Defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Robert A. Derengoski, Solicitor General, William, L. Cahalan, Prosecuting Attorney, Samuel J. 'Torina, Chief Appellate Lawyer, and Angelo A. Pentolino, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for the people.
Kenneth A. Webb, for defendant on appeal.
Before: E. B. Burns, P. J., and Holbrook and V. J. Brennan, JJ.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
Defendant was convicted on August 28, 1968, by a jury in the recorder's court for the city of Detroit of ,the crime of, breaking and entering an occupied dwelling with the intent to commit larceny, therein. . MCLA § 750.110 (Stat Ann 1968 Cum Supp § 28.305).
Defendant asserts that the maximum term of his sentence should have been 10 instead of 15 years, because complainant's private apartment is not a dwelling house within the meaning of the applicable statute. The question is one of statutory construction. At common law an apartment used as a place of residence is a dwelling house. Black's Law Dictionary (4th ed), p 596.
In the instant case the private apartment in question toas habitually used as a place of abode and, in fact, was occupied at the time of the breaking and entering. The private apartment thus qualifies as an occupied dwelling house under the statute. People v. Birts (1969), 16 Mich App 237.
Defendant asserts claims of error in the trial court's instructions. These alleged errors were not objected to at the Dial pursuant to GrCE 1963, 516.2. Claims of error not raised for consideration by the trial court may not be reviewed on appeal. People v. Omell (1968), 15 Mich App 154.
Affirmed.