Case StudiesBurglaryHitt v. Commonwealth

Burglary Case Study

Hitt v. Commonwealth

📍 Virginia Court of Appeals📅 2010⚖️ Virginia Code § 18.2-89

Legal Issue

Whether the defendant's entry into the dwelling was 'breaking' as required for common law burglary.

Court Holding

The court affirmed the burglary conviction, finding that the defendant's act of pushing open an unlocked door constituted 'breaking' for purposes of common law burglary. The court held that any application of force to open a door — even minimal force to open an unlocked door — constitutes breaking.

Defense Takeaway

Virginia's broad definition of 'breaking' means that virtually any act of opening a door or window can constitute breaking for burglary purposes. D.J. Rivera focuses on the intent element — challenging whether the defendant had the intent to commit a felony at the time of entry — rather than the breaking element in most burglary cases.

Relevant Virginia Law

This case involves § 18.2-89 of the Virginia Code. For a full analysis of how this statute applies to your case, consult with D.J. Rivera.

Facing Burglary Charges in Virginia?

D.J. Rivera applies the lessons of cases like this one to defend clients throughout Richmond and Northern Virginia. Free consultation available 24/7.

Get Your Free Consultation