Breaking and Entering (B&E)

348. (1) Breaking and entering with intent, committing offence or breaking out– Every one who

(a) breaks and enters a place with intent to commit an indictable offence therein,
(b) breaks and enters a place and commits an indictable offence therein, or
(c) breaks out of a place after
(i) committing an indictable offence therein, or
(ii) entering the place with intent to commit an indictable offence therein,

Is guilty

(d) if the offence is committed in relation to a dwelling-house, of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for life, and
(e) if the offence is committed in relation to a place other than a dwelling-house, of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years or of an offence punishable on summary conviction. 

Breaking and entering is one the most serious offences found in the Criminal Code of Canada.  The offence is particularly aggravated in cases involving the breaking and entering of a residence, with the penalties available to the sentencing judge of up to life imprisonment.

RECENT EXAMPLES:

1) The Government Official

Police were called after a man wearing a mask and carrying a weapon was reported breaking into a local hotel room.   The man was charged with B&E of a dwelling under section 348(1)(d).  Despite the lack of a criminal record, the Crown took the position that he must go to jail for at least 6 to 9 months.  As a respected municipal government official, the accused had much to lose.  He asked criminal defence lawyer Wade Jenson to take his case.  Wade Jenson successfully negotiated a plea to the lesser offence under section 348(1)(e), and convinced the court to grant his client a  CONDITIONAL DISCHARGE not available under the original charge.  No jail, no fine, no record.

2) Mental Illness

Client charged with breaking into a home and terrorizing the female resident with a knife.  Criminal lawyer Wade Jenson was retained by the accused’s family to take control of the case as the accused had some history of mental illness.  Following trial, client found NOT GUILTY BY REASON OF MENTAL DISORDER.