CALIFORNIA COURT OF APPEALS DEFINES "BURGLARY TOOLS"
The defendant in this case was convicted of California Penal Code section, possession of burglary tools. The tools he possessed were a box cutter and a slingshot.
In this case, the Court of Appeals is called on to define the term "burglary tools.". You might ask yourself, "Are you kidding?" Well, we're not.
What are "burglary tools"? Why, tools that the evidence shows are possessed with the intent to be used for burglary, of course. And the testimony of the officer that burglars use box cutters and slingshots for burglaries surely establishes such intent to use, right?
This sounds more like what the schoolyard bully would be using to extract lunch money from weaker kids than what a burglar would use to break into a house. This case is a prime example of a cop being able to testify as an "expert" on anything, and the court buying it hook, line and sinker.
Oh yes, there was also some evidence that the defendant had committed some burglaries. I wonder if that influenced the court? Of course!
People v. Kelly; 2007 DJ DAR 13357; DJ, 8/31/07; C/A 1st
