Opinion ID: 2227870
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Are the Businesses Located in Separate Occupied Structures?

Text: An individual who enters an occupied structure, without right, license or privilege, with the intent to commit a felony, assault or theft commits burglary. See Iowa Code § 713.1. Smothers does not dispute he entered Today's Modern Option and Skerik's, but he claims both businesses are contained in the one occupied structure; therefore, his conduct constituted only one burglary. The building or facility at issue encompasses one-half of a city block. It is approximately 25,000 square feet, and was described by one of its owners as three buildings in one. Skerik's is located in the original, three-story portion of the facility. Later, a second building was constructed, which houses another business, MLS, Inc. Thereafter, a four-story building was constructed, in which Today's Modern Option is now located. Heavy brick walls were constructed between the buildings, and fire doors were erected connecting each of the buildings. Today's Modern Option leases its premises from the company which owns Skerik's and MLS. Iowa Code section 702.12 defines occupied structure as follows: An occupied structure is any building, structure, appurtenances to buildings and structures, land, water or air vehicle, or similar place adapted for overnight accommodation of persons, or occupied by persons for the purpose of carrying on business or other activity therein, or for the storage or safekeeping of anything of value. Such a structure is an occupied structure whether or not a person is actually present. However, for purposes of chapter 713 [burglary], a box, chest, safe, changer, or other object or device which is adapted or used for the deposit or storage of anything of value but which is too small or not designed to allow a person to physically enter or occupy it is not an occupied structure. The crux of Smothers' argument rests on the meaning of structure. The Code does not define a structure; therefore, the term should be given its ordinary meaning. See State v. Jones, 524 N.W.2d 172, 174 (Iowa 1994) (Words of a statute are given their plain or ordinary meaning absent legislative definition or particular meaning in the law.). Structure is defined as something constructed or built. Webster's Third New Int'l Dictionary 2267 (unabr. ed.1976). Black's Law Dictionary defines structure as: Any construction, or any production or piece of work artificially built up or composed of parts joined together in some definite manner. That which is built or constructed; an edifice or building of any kind. A combination of materials to form a construction for occupancy, use or ornamentation whether installed on, above, or below the surface of a parcel of land. Black's Law Dictionary 1424 (6th ed.1990). In arguing that the businesses are contained within one occupied structure, Smothers isolates a portion of the latter definition of structure and argues Today's Modern Option and Skerik's Auto Parts are parts composing one structure, focusing on the accessibility between the two businesses by the interior fire doors. We find Smothers' narrow interpretation of structure unpersuasive. We have previously determined that the definition of occupied structure is broad. See State v. Baker, 560 N.W.2d 10, 13 (Iowa 1997). Clearly the portions of the facility at issue constitute something constructed or built or any construction. The facility's construction history and physical make-up demonstrates that the portions are independent working units which constitute [a] combination of materials to form a construction for occupancy [or] use. Today's Modern Option and Skerik's are separate legal entities which occupy independent and distinct portions of the facility. Each has its own entrance from the street, each is separately owned and operated, and each is secured for the most part from access by the other. Although the businesses share common walls and are accessible by interior fire doors, those doors are used for very limited purposes. [2] The evidence is undisputed that the businesses occupy separate premises and conduct their operations exclusive of the other. We conclude the businesses are located in separate structures used for the purpose of carrying on business. Therefore, Smothers entered two occupied structures.