Opinion ID: 1806165
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Admissibility of items.

Text: An element of the crime of burglary is that intentional entry was made with intent to steal or commit a felony therein. [3] Various items, allegedly taken from the Vaslow home, were introduced into evidence, including the watch, the Australian florin, the Lloyd transistor radio, and the Skippy peanut butter jar which had been recovered by the police from the bushes near the church where both Donald and David testified defendant had thrown it. These items were admissible because they tend to directly establish that entry was made with intent to steal. [4] That these items coincidentally prove theft is of no import for the defendant was not charged with theft in addition to burglary as he could have been. [5] Defendant's objection to the introduction of these items for the reason that they were not sufficiently identified by the Vaslows as belonging to them has no merit. On the record the items were sufficiently identified to permit the jury to consider them in its determination of guilt. [6] The fact that defendant was not in actual possession of these items at the time of his arrest is immaterial since the testimony clearly showed a link to the defendant. [7]