2016 NMSC 011
N.M.2016Background
- On Dec. 19, 2010, homeowner Carolyn Stamper observed Anthony Holt partially removing the living-room window screen of her residence; his fingers were behind the screen and inside the home’s outer boundary.
- Stamper was about 2.5 feet from Holt when she saw him; he looked up, apologized, and fled.
- Holt was arrested and charged with breaking and entering under NMSA 1978, § 30-14-8(A), which requires an unauthorized entry.
- At trial, Holt moved for a directed verdict arguing no entry occurred because he never fully went inside; the district court denied the motion.
- A jury convicted Holt; he received an aggregate sentence including an 18‑month term for breaking-and-entering and enhancements.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed in a divided opinion; the New Mexico Supreme Court granted certiorari to decide whether placing fingers behind a window screen constitutes an "entry."
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether placing fingers behind an affixed window screen constitutes an “entry” under § 30‑14‑8(A) | The screen is the outer barrier of the dwelling; penetrating it is an intrusion into enclosed, private space and thus an entry | An entry requires penetration of interior protected space beyond the outermost plane; fingers behind a screen do not reach interior space | Penetrating a window screen affixed to a dwelling is an intrusion into enclosed, private, prohibited space and constitutes an "entry" for § 30‑14‑8(A) |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Treadway, 130 P.3d 746 (N.M. 2006) (evidence viewed in light most favorable to verdict)
- State v. Muqqddin, 285 P.3d 622 (N.M. 2012) (modern burglary protects the right to exclude and privacy; enclosure defines expectation of privacy)
- State v. Tixier, 551 P.2d 987 (N.M. Ct. App. 1976) (any penetration, however slight, of interior space constitutes entry)
- State v. Sorrelhorse, 263 P.3d 313 (N.M. Ct. App. 2011) (least intrusion can constitute entry)
- People v. Nible, 247 Cal. Rptr. 396 (Cal. Ct. App. 1988) (window screen is part of the dwelling; penetration of screen is entry under burglary law)
- State v. Holt, 352 P.3d 702 (N.M. Ct. App. 2015) (Court of Appeals affirmed conviction; decision reviewed on certiorari)