State v. Machan, 322 P.3d 655

Machan was charged with aggravated burglary, aggravated assault, and domestic violence in the presence of a child after entering the family home and brandishing a rifle.
Six months earlier, Machan was arrested and removed from the home; a restraining order prohibited him from returning for 150 days and expired three weeks before the incident.
A magistrate ruled there was insufficient evidence that Machan relinquished possessory rights to the home, so burglary could not be proven; the burglary charge was dismissed while other charges proceeded.
The State pursued an interlocutory appeal challenging the bindover determination on the burglary issue.
The court must decide whether an estranged spouse can implicitly relinquish possessory rights to a shared home via voluntary separation or other conduct.
The court ultimately holds that there is insufficient evidence of voluntary relinquishment to support a finding of unlawful entry.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether entry was unlawful absent relinquishment of possessory rights	State argues implied relinquishment via separate residence and conduct	Machan contends no voluntary relinquishment occurred	No sufficient evidence of implied relinquishment; entry not shown to be unlawful
What conduct can evidence relinquishment of possessory rights	State relies on factors like moving out, removing belongings, and lacking keys	Machan argues such conduct is not conclusive without mutual consent	Contextual factors insufficient to prove mutual relinquishment
Whether the magistrate properly applied the bindover standard and did not abuse discretion	Magistrate correctly applied limited credibility and deference standards	Machan did not offer contrary arguments specific to the standard	Magistrate did not abuse discretion; State failed to prove the issue

State v. Maughan, 305 P.3d 1058 (Utah 2013) (bindover standard; evidence sufficient to support reasonable belief)
State v. Virgin, 137 P.3d 787 (Utah 2006) (limited deference in bindover; credibility not weighed at this stage)
Spence v. State, 768 N.W.2d 104 (Minn. 2009) (consent and possessory rights under burglary analysis)
Hagedorn v. Iowa, 679 N.W.2d 666 (Iowa 2004) (possession/occupancy focus in burglary analysis)
O’Neal v. Ohio, 658 N.E.2d 1104 (Ohio 1995) (mutual decision to live apart affects possessory rights)
Gill v. People, 70 Cal.Rptr.3d 850 (Cal.App.4th 2008) (surrender of keys evidence of relinquishment of possession)
Hollenbeck v. People, 944 P.2d 537 (Colo. App. 1996) (implied contract transfers of possession from conduct)
McMillan v. State, 973 A.2d 294 (N.H. 2009) (defendant no longer had a key; relinquishment evidence)
Byars v. State, 745 So.2d 740 (Fla. 2002) (court order can negate right to enter premises)