The following excerpt is from Diaz-Flores v. Garland, 993 F.3d 766 (9th Cir. 2021):
Even if the burglar happens to break in when the victim is not home, the sanctity of the home has still been violated. "[A]n individual's expectation that her dwelling will remain private, secure, and free from intruders intending to commit a crime is violated regardless whether the dwelling is occupied at the time of the burglary." Uribe v. Sessions , 855 F.3d 622, 62627 (4th Cir. 2017) (classifying an analogous Maryland burglary statute as a CIMT); see also California v. Ciraolo , 476 U.S. 207, 213, 106 S.Ct. 1809, 90 L.Ed.2d 210 (1986) (recognizing concern for privacy is "most heightened" in a person's home, "both physically and psychologically").
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.