Summary
In Sealey v. State, 379 So.2d 430 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980), we adopted the rationale of Tobler, DeGeorge, and Greer and concluded that the burglary statute extended the application of curtilage to any building, not just a dwelling.
Summary of this case from Hamilton v. StateOpinion
No. 79-1366.
January 30, 1980.
Appeal from the Circuit Court, Polk County, Oliver L. Green, J.
Jack O. Johnson, Public Defender, and P. Douglas Brinkmeyer, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Michael J. Kotler, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.
Affirmed. We agree with the decisions of the First, Third, and Fourth District Courts of Appeal that Section 810.011(1), Florida Statutes, extends the application of curtilage to the area surrounding any building, not just a dwelling, for purposes of defining a burglary. Tobler v. State, 371 So.2d 1043 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979); DeGeorge v. State, 358 So.2d 217 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); Greer v. State, 354 So.2d 952 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978).
GRIMES, C.J., and SCHEB and OTT, JJ., concur.