People v. Larry, 45 N.E.3d 342

Defendant Brian Larry and victim Shalonda Harris were long‑term romantic partners; Larry frequently stayed at Harris’s first‑floor apartment and kept clothing there.
On March 16, 2013, after Harris told Larry not to return, Larry shattered the living‑room window, entered the apartment, assaulted Harris (pulled her hair), and left carrying her desktop computer.
Police later stopped Larry nearby; he was injured and carrying the computer. He gave a statement admitting he broke the window and took the computer to ‘‘aggravate’’ Harris.
Harris testified Larry ‘‘lived’’ with her but did not have his own keys; Larry did not testify at trial.
The trial court convicted Larry of residential burglary (Class 1), domestic battery (Class 4), and criminal trespass; it reasoned Larry did not live there because he lacked keys and broke in. The court sentenced him to five years for burglary and an extended five‑year term for domestic battery.
On appeal, the court reversed the residential burglary conviction for insufficient evidence that the apartment was the ‘‘dwelling place of another’’ and affirmed the extended‑term sentence for domestic battery (which remained the most serious conviction after the reversal).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the State proved Larry entered the "dwelling place of another" for residential burglary	The apartment was "of another" because Larry lacked a key and forced entry through a window	Larry actually resided at the apartment (kept clothes there, lived with Harris), so it was not "of another"	Reversed burglary conviction: State failed to prove the dwelling was "of another" because occupancy, not key possession, controls
Trial court’s failure to recall Harris’s testimony that Larry lived with her	State implicitly: trial court credibility findings justified not revisiting testimony	Larry: trial court erred by not recalling testimony that supported his residency defense	Court treated issue as part of sufficiency review and rejected trial court’s factual basis; residency evidence warranted reversal of burglary conviction
Legality of five‑year extended‑term sentence under 730 ILCS 5/5‑8‑2	State conceded extended term must attach only to the most serious offense	Larry: extended term improper because it attached to domestic battery when residential burglary was a more serious offense	Because burglary conviction was reversed, extended term for domestic battery remains valid and is affirmed

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (establishes standard for sufficiency of the evidence review)
In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358 (State must prove every element beyond a reasonable doubt)
People v. Bell, 403 Ill. App. 3d 398 (possession of a key not dispositive of actual residency or common authority)
People v. Mitchell, 152 Ill. 2d 274 (trial court recall/related procedural considerations)
People v. Rankin, 2015 IL App (1st) 133409 (elements of residential burglary and sufficiency principles)