People v. Barefield, No. 87CA0999

Docket NºNo. 87CA0999
Citation804 P.2d 1342
Case DateSeptember 06, 1990
CourtCourt of Appeals of Colorado

Page 1342

804 P.2d 1342
The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Byron L. BAREFIELD, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 87CA0999.
Colorado Court of Appeals,
Div. V.
Sept. 6, 1990. *
Rehearing Denied Oct. 18, 1990.
Certiorari Denied Jan. 28, 1991.

Page 1344

Duane Woodard, Atty. Gen., Charles B. Howe, Chief Deputy Atty. Gen., Richard H. Forman, Sol. Gen., John Milton Hutchins, First Asst. Atty. Gen., Deborah Isenberg Pratt, Asst. Atty. Gen., Denver, for plaintiff-appellee.

Robert W. Thompson, Jr., Denver, for defendant-appellant.

Opinion by Judge DUBOFSKY.

Defendant, Byron L. Barefield, appeals from a judgment of conviction entered upon a jury verdict finding him guilty of second degree burglary and attempted theft. He also challenges the sentence imposed and appeals from the trial court's order denying his Crim.P. 35(c) motion. We affirm the judgment of conviction and the denial of the post-conviction motion.

I.

Defendant contends the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction for second degree burglary. He argues that because he was working as a janitor in the building where the offense took place, the prosecution failed to prove that he knowingly broke an entrance into, or entered, or remained unlawfully in a building. The "burglarized" office was used by a Jefferson County attorney and was part of the Jefferson County Courthouse Complex. We conclude that all elements of the offense were demonstrated by the evidence.

A person commits second degree burglary if he knowingly breaks an entrance into, or enters, or remains unlawfully in a building or occupied structure with intent to commit therein a crime against a person or property. Section 18-4-203(1), C.R.S. (1986 Repl.Vol. 8B). A person "unlawfully enters or remains" in or upon premises when he is not licensed, invited, or otherwise privileged to do so. Section 18-4-201(3), C.R.S. (1986 Repl.Vol. 8B).

The record reflects that the defendant used keys given to him in the course of his employment to enter a locked office which had a sign on the door stating: "Do not enter or clean this office. Sensitive material involved. Thanks. John." The county attorney testified he had previously used the signs to restrict access to his office in order to protect privileged or sensitive materials involving his cases. Furthermore, he testified that the janitorial staff was on notice to respect and follow these signs.

In a post-arrest statement given by the defendant and admitted into evidence, the defendant confessed that he entered the locked office to look for something to steal after having read the sign.

Analysis of this evidence reveals the presence of evidence to support all the elements of the crime of burglary. Defendant argues, however, that the county attorney did not have the authority to revoke his right to enter the office. He claims that only an administrative agency or building superintendent, acting as agent for Jefferson County government, had such authority. We disagree.

Page 1345

Previously granted authority to enter a premise must be withdrawn before a person so authorized can be convicted of burglary. See People v. Carstensen, 161 Colo. 249, 420 P.2d 820 (1966); Stowell v. People, 104 Colo. 255, 90 P.2d 520 (1939). A general grant of authority or license to enter a part of a building does not necessarily include the right to enter subunits or other parts of the building. See People v. Germany, 41 Colo.App. 304, 586 P.2d 1006 (1978), rev'd on other grounds, 198 Colo. 337, 599 P.2d 904 (1979).

In Sloan v. People, 65 Colo. 456, 176 P. 481 (1918), the court held that any rightful possession of a premises creates a sufficient "ownership" or...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 practice notes
  • People v. Boyd, Court of Appeals No. 12CA2607
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals of Colorado
    • August 13, 2015
    ...date, see People v. Holland, 708 P.2d 119, 120 (Colo.1985) ; People v. Macias, 631 P.2d 584, 586 (Colo.1981) ; People v. Barefield, 804 P.2d 1342, 1346 (Colo.App.1990) ; People v. Collyer, 736 P.2d 1267, 1269 (Colo.App.1987) ; or (2) does not apply to offenses committed prior to the effecti......
  • People v. Zuniga, No. 02CA0724.
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals of Colorado
    • October 23, 2003
    ...contain specific facts that would substantiate his claim. See People v. Chambers, 900 P.2d 1249 (Colo.App.1994); People v. Barefield, 804 P.2d 1342 (Colo.App.1990); see also People v. Rodriguez, 914 P.2d 230 (Colo. 1996). Accordingly, the trial court correctly denied defendant's motion in t......
  • People v. Mondragon, No. 06CA1293.
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals of Colorado
    • April 16, 2009
    ...enter a part of a building does not necessarily include the right to enter subunits or other parts of the building." People v. Barefield, 804 P.2d 1342, 1345 (Colo.App.1990). In determining whether a defendant has committed burglary, the focus is upon the possessory rights of the victim, no......
  • People v. Lopez, No. 94CA1171
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals of Colorado
    • January 23, 1997
    ...(Colo.App.1996) (burglary occurred when inmate at county jail entered cell of another inmate without permission); People v. Barefield, 804 P.2d 1342 (Colo.App.1990) (janitor in public office building committed burglary when entering a locked office, which he was not authorized to enter, wit......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
15 cases
  • People v. Boyd, Court of Appeals No. 12CA2607
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals of Colorado
    • August 13, 2015
    ...date, see People v. Holland, 708 P.2d 119, 120 (Colo.1985) ; People v. Macias, 631 P.2d 584, 586 (Colo.1981) ; People v. Barefield, 804 P.2d 1342, 1346 (Colo.App.1990) ; People v. Collyer, 736 P.2d 1267, 1269 (Colo.App.1987) ; or (2) does not apply to offenses committed prior to the effecti......
  • People v. Zuniga, No. 02CA0724.
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals of Colorado
    • October 23, 2003
    ...contain specific facts that would substantiate his claim. See People v. Chambers, 900 P.2d 1249 (Colo.App.1994); People v. Barefield, 804 P.2d 1342 (Colo.App.1990); see also People v. Rodriguez, 914 P.2d 230 (Colo. 1996). Accordingly, the trial court correctly denied defendant's motion in t......
  • People v. Mondragon, No. 06CA1293.
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals of Colorado
    • April 16, 2009
    ...a part of a building does not necessarily include the right to enter subunits or other parts of the building." People v. Barefield, 804 P.2d 1342, 1345 (Colo.App.1990). In determining whether a defendant has committed burglary, the focus is upon the possessory rights of the victim, not......
  • People v. Lopez, No. 94CA1171
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals of Colorado
    • January 23, 1997
    ...(Colo.App.1996) (burglary occurred when inmate at county jail entered cell of another inmate without permission); People v. Barefield, 804 P.2d 1342 (Colo.App.1990) (janitor in public office building committed burglary when entering a locked office, which he was not authorized to enter, wit......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT