Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Share your feedback on this Case Brief

Thank You For Submiting Feedback!

  • Law School Case Brief

Commonwealth v. Wilamowski - 534 Pa. 373, 633 A.2d 141 (1993)

Rule:

At both common law and statutory law, the crime of burglary or attempted burglary encompasses the element of intent to commit a felony or any qualified crime within the burglarized premises.

Facts:

At approximately 11:00 p.m., a sleeping homeowner was aroused in his darkened house by a loud noise. He discovered that the door to his integral garage had been pushed in by a crushing blow which had caused it to split off from its frame and pulled off of its three hinges. The same loud noise also had awakened a neighbor who, upon getting out of bed, heard a knock at his side door. Answering the knock, he was faced by the Appellant who was asking for directions. The neighbor then went to the garage where the homeowner was inspecting the damage. After exchanging information, they began pursuing the Appellant who was still in sight and yelling for him to stop. Appellant eluded the chase. The police were able to trace the Appellant. Appellant’s boot and the footprint on the damaged door matched. Appellant was charged with and convicted of attempted burglary and criminal mischief. Appellant argued that in the absence of proof of a requisite intent to steal, he could only be convicted of criminal mischief.

Issue:

Was the evidence sufficient to convict appellant of attempted burglary? 

Answer:

No.

Conclusion:

The court reversed the order affirming appellant's conviction for attempted burglary, but affirmed his conviction for criminal mischief. The court held that although the Commonwealth's facts proved that appellant kicked at a door and tore it off of its hinges, there was no additional evidence to establish that he possessed an intent to commit a crime inside a home. The court found that evidence of appellant's subsequent flight was also insufficient, standing alone, to lend any support to an inference of intent to commit a crime inside, because the flight was consistent with his efforts to avoid apprehension for his conduct of breaking down the door.

Access the full text case

Essential Class Preparation Skills

  • How to Answer Your Professor's Questions
  • How to Brief a Case
  • Don't Miss Important Points of Law with BARBRI Outlines (Login Required)

Essential Class Resources

  • CivPro
  • Contracts
  • Constitutional Law
  • Corporations /Business Organizations
  • Criminal Law
  • Criminal Procedure/Investigation
  • Evidence
  • Legal Ethics/Professional Responsibility
  • Property
  • Secured Transactions
  • Torts
  • Trusts & Estates