People v. Johnson, 2019 IL 123318

Darren Johnson was charged with burglary (720 ILCS 5/19-1(a)) and retail theft after entering a Walmart; surveillance and eyewitnesses showed he and an accomplice placed backpacks in the vestibule, entered the store, concealed merchandise, and later retrieved backpacks to stash items. 14 items (children’s clothing) totaling $76.91 were recovered and Johnson admitted stealing.
Jury convicted Johnson of burglary and acquitted him of retail theft; trial court sentenced him to eight years (within an enhanced range due to prior record).
On appeal the Third District reversed the burglary conviction as a matter of law, holding that entry during business hours into areas open to the public was not “without authority” and concluding Weaver was distinguishable and Bradford effectively limited Weaver.
The State sought review; the Illinois Supreme Court granted leave and considered whether Weaver’s “limited authority” doctrine applies when a defendant enters an open retail store with intent to steal.
The Supreme Court held Weaver governs burglary-by-entry claims: entering a business open to the public is unauthorized if the entrant had intent to commit theft upon entry; it reversed the appellate court and remanded for consideration of the remaining issues (including sufficiency of intent at entry).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether entry during business hours into a store is “without authority” when defendant intended to steal upon entry	Weaver applies; intent at entry vitiates authority to enter	Weaver inapplicable; retail theft statute displaces Weaver; Bradford should control	Weaver applies to unauthorized entry with intent to steal; appellate court erred; judgment reversed and remanded
Sufficiency of evidence that defendant intended to commit theft at the time of entry	Evidence (vestibule/backpack conduct, surveillance, admissions) supports intent at entry	Evidence insufficient; entry was within public areas during business hours	Not decided by Supreme Court here; remanded to appellate court for review
Trial judge’s prohibition on juror note-taking (725 ILCS 5/115-4(n))	N/A (State did not urge this as dispositive here)	Prohibition violated statutory right to take notes; warrants new trial	Not decided by Supreme Court here; remanded to appellate court for review
Claim for correction of fines/credits (assessment reduction from $557 to $490)	N/A	Trial court failed to award mandatory $5/day credit on certain assessments	Not decided by Supreme Court here; remanded to appellate court for review

People v. Weaver, 41 Ill. 2d 434 (1968) (establishes limited-authority rule: entry into a business open to the public is unauthorized if entrant has intent to commit theft at entry)
People v. Bradford, 2016 IL 118674 (2016) (clarifies burglary-by-remaining and rejects extending Weaver to every ‘‘remaining’’ scenario; does not overrule Weaver as to entry)
People v. Kelley, 274 Ill. 556 (1916) (early Illinois discussion of entry-with-intent theories under burglary)
People v. Brown, 397 Ill. 529 (1947) (upholding burglary conviction where defendant entered a business open to the public with intent to steal)