Conn. Crim. Jury Instr. 9.2-2

Note: This instruction applies to crimes committed on or after March 1, 2008. For crimes

committed before that date, see Instruction 9.2-2 (archived).

The defendant is charged [in count__] with burglary in the first degree. The statute defining this

offense reads in pertinent part as follows:

a person is guilty of burglary in the first degree when such person unlawfully (enters /

remains in)1 a dwelling at night with intent to commit a crime therein.

For you to find the defendant guilty of this charge, the state must prove the following elements

beyond a reasonable doubt:

Element 1 - Entered/remained in dwelling

The first element is that the defendant knowingly and unlawfully (entered / remained in) a

dwelling. A person acts “knowingly” with respect to conduct or circumstances when (he/she) is

aware that (his/her) conduct is of such nature or that such circumstances exist. <See Knowledge,

Instruction 2.3-3.>

“Dwelling” means a building that is usually occupied by a person lodging therein at night,

whether or not a person is actually present. Therefore, a structure that cannot possibly be

occupied as a lodging cannot be a dwelling. It need not, however, be actually occupied by any

person at the time of crime; it does not lose its character as a dwelling merely because it is

temporarily unoccupied, if such occupancy at night is its usual state.

You must also determine whether the defendant unlawfully (entered / remained in) the dwelling.

A person unlawfully (enters / remains in) a dwelling when (he/she) is not licensed or privileged

to do so. To be “licensed or privileged,” the defendant must either have consent from the person

in possession of the dwelling or have some other right to be in the dwelling.

[To “enter” a dwelling the intruder need not necessarily place (his/her) entire body inside the

dwelling. Inserting any part of (his/her) body, or an implement or weapon held by (him/her),

within the dwelling is sufficient to constitute an entry as long as it is without license or privilege.

It does not matter how an intruder may actually have entered; if (he/she) did so without license

or privilege, (he/she) has entered unlawfully.]

[A person may have entered a dwelling lawfully, that is, (he/she) had the right or had been given

permission, but that right is terminated or the permission withdrawn by someone who had a right

to terminate or withdraw it. You may find that the defendant “unlawfully remained” in the

dwelling under these circumstances.]

Element 2 - At night

The second element is that the defendant (entered / remained in) the dwelling at night. “Night”

means the period between thirty minutes after sunset and thirty minutes before sunrise.2

Element 3 - Intent to commit a crime

The third element is that the defendant intended to commit a crime in that dwelling. A person

acts “intentionally” with respect to a result when (his/her) conscious objective is to cause such

result. <See Intent: Specific, Instruction 2.3-1.>

Even if the defendant never actually committed a crime in the dwelling, if the evidence

establishes beyond a reasonable doubt that (he/she) was there with such intention, this is

sufficient to prove that the defendant unlawfully (entered / remained in) the dwelling with the

intent to commit a crime therein. Furthermore, the necessary intent to commit a crime must be

an intent to commit either a felony or a misdemeanor in addition to the unlawful entering or

remaining in the dwelling.

In this case, the state claims that the defendant intended to commit <insert crime>. <Refer to the

count in which this crime is charged or, if uncharged, give the elements of the crime.>

Conclusion

In summary, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant 1) unlawfully

(entered / remained in) a dwelling, 2) it was at night, and 3) (he/she) had the intent to commit a

crime.

If you unanimously find that the state has proved beyond a reasonable doubt each of the elements

of the crime of burglary in the first degree, then you shall find the defendant guilty. On the other

hand, if you unanimously find that the state has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt any of

the elements, you shall then find the defendant not guilty.

1 Do not instruct on both “unlawful entering” and “unlawful remaining” if the information and

the evidence could support a conceptual distinction between the two. See “enters or remains

unlawfully” in the glossary.

2 “The time of sunrise and sunset on any given day is a matter that falls within the realm of facts

which are capable of immediate and accurate demonstration by resort to easily accessible sources

of indisputable accuracy and therefore may be judicially noticed.” State v. Zayas, 195 Conn.

611, 614 (1985).

3 When instructing on burglary, “trial courts should name and define the elements of the crimes

for which there is evidence to support a finding of an intent to commit . . . .” State v. Kyle A., 348

Conn. 437, 446 (2024). It is the state’s obligation to determine the intended crime or crimes. Id.,

451-52. “[F]ailure . . . to instruct the jury on the elements of a crime so identified by the state

will constitute an obvious error that will warrant reversal if it results in a manifest injustice.” Id.,

452.