CRIMINAL LAW

SECTION 1 - COLQUITT

FALL, 2002

Soto v. State

782 S.W.2d 17 (Tex. App. 1989)

This is an appeal from a jury conviction of burglary of a vehicle. The trial court assessed punishment at thirty-five (35) years' imprisonment after finding both enhancement paragraphs true.

Summary of Facts

Two San Antonio police officers with the Repeat Offenders Project testified that they watched while a dark blue Mercury Marquis pulled into the parking lot of a Moose Lodge in Bexar County at about 10:45 p.m. on the night of September 2, 1987. Both officers, watching through binoculars, saw three men in the car. The two passengers in the Marquis were appellant and [co-defendant] Garcia. The driver was a man named James Onie.

The car came to a stop beside a 1978 Ford F100 pickup truck. Garcia and Onie got out of their auto and walked toward the lodge building. They returned a few minutes later and appellant emerged from the car. The pickup truck had a toolbox attached to the bed. Appellant, using a pry bar or screwdriver, pried open one side of the toolbox and began removing tools from the toolbox. Garcia exited the Marquis, went to the Ford pickup truck and assisted Soto in carrying the tools back to the Marquis. They put the tools, including a lug wrench and a jack, into the back set of the Marquis. Next, appellant and Onie removed a red drill case from the truck's toolbox and put it in the trunk of the Marquis.

[After a chase by officers, the suspects were arrested and prosecuted.]

[A]ppellant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction for burglary of a vehicle because the evidence showed only that he entered a locked toolbox secured to the bed of the pickup truck and removed tools from the toolbox rather than from the vehicle. Appellant argues that because the toolbox was an item attached to the bed of the pickup truck, it was not part of the vehicle. We disagree.

The elements of burglary of a vehicle are that a person, without the consent of the owner, breaks into or enters a vehicle or any part of a vehicle with intent to commit theft. * * * It is the duty of the State to prove each and every element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.

In the instant case, witnesses testified that appellant broke the locks on a toolbox in the bed of the pickup truck and removed items from that box. The owner of the truck testified that the toolbox is bolted to the open bed of the truck and locked with padlocks.

This issue presented is clear and apparently one of first impression: does such a locked toolbox bolted to the bed of a pickup truck constitute "any part of a vehicle" as required by our [Code section]. We hold that it does and overrule appellant's first point of error.

* * *

AFFIRMED.

Return to Top of Document

OTHER PAGES