California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Webster, F069405 (Cal. App. 2016):
The crime of burglary requires "an entry into a specified structure with the intent to commit theft or any felony. [Citations.]" (People v. Tafoya (2007) 42 Cal.4th 147, 170-171.) Possession of stolen property by itself is insufficient to permit an inference that a defendant is guilty of any offense without some corroborating evidence. (People v. Moore (2011) 51 Cal.4th 1104, 1130.)
"CALJIC No. 2.15 is based on the long-standing rule allowing a jury to infer guilt of a theft-related crime from the fact that a defendant is found in possession of recently stolen property when such evidence is accompanied by slight corroboration of other inculpatory circumstances tending to show guilt. [Citation.]" (People v. Rogers (2013) 57 Cal.4th 296, 335.) A defendant's false statements regarding stolen property may be used to corroborate an inference of guilt, and a conviction for burglary can be supported from possession of recently stolen property along with a false explanation. (People v. McFarland (1962) 58 Cal.2d 748, 754.)
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.