English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

My 18 year old son was charged with burglary, a class D felony in Indiana, 20,000$ bail. He said he did not steal anything, they have him on video in the house. Would'nt that be considered breaking & entering. He was in the house but nothing was taken. He will get a court appointed lawyer and I will not be bailing him out. This is his first offense and if I have anything to do with it, it will be his last, that is why I will not bail him out. He done the crime now he will serve the time.

2007-04-27 07:16:08 · 9 answers · asked by lkgardner64 1 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

9 answers

At common law, burglary was defined as "entry of a dwelling house of another at night for the purpose of committing a felony therein." The law has been changed, and each state's laws are different. The Indiana Statute says: "5-43-2-1 Sec. 1. A person who breaks and enters the building or structure of another person, with intent to commit a felony in it, commits burglary, a Class C felony. However, the offense is:
(1) a Class B felony if:
(A) it is committed while armed with a deadly weapon; or
(B) the building or structure is a:
(i) dwelling; or
(ii) structure used for religious worship;"

You know, even if he stole nothing, he would be charged with "Residential Entry", 35-43-2-1.5 Sec. 1.5. A person who knowingly or intentionally breaks and enters the dwelling of another person commits residential entry, a Class D felony.


As for sentencing, refer to 35-50-2-1 Sec. 1. (a) As used in this chapter, "Class D felony conviction" means a conviction of a Class D felony in Indiana and a conviction, in any other jurisdiction at any time, with respect to which the convicted person might have been imprisoned for more than one (1) year. However, it does not include a conviction with respect to which the person has been pardoned, or a conviction of a Class A misdemeanor under section 7(b) of this chapter.
(b) As used in this chapter, "felony conviction" means a conviction, in any jurisdiction at any time, with respect to which the convicted person might have been imprisoned for more than one (1) year. However, it does not include a conviction with respect to which the person has been pardoned, or a conviction of a Class A misdemeanor under section 7(b) of this chapter.
(c) As used in this chapter, "minimum sentence" means:
(1) for murder, forty-five (45) years;
(2) for a Class A felony, twenty (20) years;
(3) for a Class B felony, six (6) years;
(4) for a Class C felony, two (2) years; and
(5) for a Class D felony, one-half (1/2) year.

We have plea bargaining, and it will be a matter of working out a deal between his defense attorney and the prosecuting attorney. He is a first time offender, and I believe his sentence would be less than 6 months with credit for time served, and he will go on probation. With luck, he may be eligible for work release.

2007-04-27 12:11:07 · answer #1 · answered by Mark 7 · 0 0

Burglary is the entering into a dwelling (some jurisdictions require it to be at night) with the intent to commit a crime inside the dwelling. This is what is known as a specific intent crime. The prosecutor will need to prove that your son wanted to commit some additional crime in the home, this could be stealing, rape, murder, assault, kidnapping, etc. All that matters is what your son's intent was, not that he was successful. Thus, it is unnecessary that something actually be stolen.

Burglary is commonly misunderstood as being associated with stealing. It isn't. It just happens that the crime often committed during a burglary is theft (which is the actual crime for stealing).

2007-04-27 08:11:09 · answer #2 · answered by Tara P 5 · 0 0

Accoding to Black's Law Dictionary: "At common law, the crime of burglary consisted of a breaking and entering of a dwelling....with the INTENT to commit a felony therein." Therefore, your son's actions depend upon his state of mind, i.e. his "intent." It would also constitute "breaking and entering." They can charge him with at least 2 offenses, "breaking and entering" being a separate offense. I think you're wise not to bail him out. He's got to convince the prosecutor that he entered the house for another purpose, but I don't know how he'll do that. I say the good news is that if this is his first offense, he's likely to get a deferred sentence and bailing him out could be detrimental since he'll get credit for time served when he's sentenced.

2007-04-27 07:34:57 · answer #3 · answered by David M 7 · 1 0

As a matter of fact, the term "burglary" means the same thing as "breaking and entering". Nothing needs to be stolen - a person commits "burglary" if he enters a house for the purpose of committing a crime.

Good luck to you and your son in this difficult time.

2007-04-27 07:47:35 · answer #4 · answered by LawMom 3 · 1 1

Just because he was an unsuccessful burglar does not mean he didn't commit burglary.

Good for you for not bailing him out. He needs to learn an important lesson in morals and responsibility.

2007-04-27 07:30:44 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

They don't have to actually steal anything- intent to steal is enough for it to be considered a burglary.

The fact that they know he was in the house is probably enough to claim he had intent.

2007-04-27 07:25:02 · answer #6 · answered by Behaviorist 6 · 1 0

Nothing NEEDS to be stolen for it to be considered burglary.

2007-04-27 07:25:42 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

****DISCLAIMER: this isn't criminal suggestion, USE AT your own possibility**** This state of affairs looks more advantageous like breaking and getting into (in case you used stress to enter the progression) and trespassing. in case you stay in Canada there's a severe possibility of the Justice (decide) throwing this situation out and the police will in all possibility charge you with one count number of breaking and getting into and one count number of trespassing. both way you'll likely no longer face penal complicated time in case you instruct to the Justice that you at the instantaneous are not achieveable to society. in case you had a actual altercation with all people on the scene then you truly can be charged with attack as well and serve penal complicated time. i'm a lot less attentive to the justice equipment of united statesa. yet am in simple terms about certain that you would possibly want to be despatched to penal complicated there.

2016-11-28 02:57:34 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

the lawyer can help reduce his sentence. you are correct, he did a wrong and should justify it.

I do hope that he only gets what he deserves and not worse or it could turn him the other way (the way you are hoping he won't go)

2007-04-27 07:21:07 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers