## Facts

- In May 2011, M. was working alone at a small store in Escondido, California.
- Hugo Garcia entered the store, left, then returned and asked M. unusual questions before producing a gun.
- Garcia pointed the gun at M. and demanded cash from the register and from her person, which she surrendered.
- Garcia ordered M. to close the store and move toward the back, asked about a bathroom, and directed her down the hallway.
- M. begged Garcia not to hurt her; he ordered her to remove her clothes and motioned for her to go to the bathroom.
- Garcia entered the bathroom with M. and raped her and committed penetration with a foreign object.
- Garcia told M. to remain in the bathroom and left in her vehicle.
- A jury convicted Garcia of multiple crimes, including two burglaries (counts 1 and 4) and sexual offenses (counts 5 and 6), and found firearm and One Strike allegations true.
- The trial court imposed an aggregate sentence of 74 years four months to life and imposed a $10,000 restitution fine under Penal Code § 1202.4(b)(1).

## Issues

1. Whether substantial evidence supported a second burglary conviction (count 4) based on Garcia’s entry into an interior bathroom with intent to commit a sexual felony.
2. Whether imposing a $10,000 restitution fine within the statutory range violated the Sixth Amendment because the fine amount was not based on jury-found facts beyond a reasonable doubt.

## Decision

- The court affirmed the conviction for second-degree burglary on count 4.
- The court held there was substantial evidence that the bathroom was a distinct “room” and that Garcia entered it with intent to commit sexual offenses.
- The court upheld the $10,000 restitution fine, concluding no jury fact-finding was constitutionally required for a fine selected within the statutory range.
- The judgment was affirmed, subject to minor clerical corrections to the abstract of judgment.

## Legal Principles

- Penal Code § 459’s reference to entry of a “room” permits a separate burglary based on entry into a distinct interior room within a building when the defendant forms felonious intent at that later entry.
- On substantial-evidence review, the record is viewed in the light most favorable to the judgment, and the conviction stands if a reasonable trier of fact could find the elements beyond a reasonable doubt.
- A restitution fine imposed under Penal Code § 1202.4(b)(1) within the statutory range may be selected by the court in its sentencing discretion without additional jury findings.
- Apprendi/Blakely does not require jury determinations for a restitution fine amount that does not exceed the statutory maximum authorized by the conviction.

## Conclusion

The court sustained a second burglary conviction where the defendant entered an interior bathroom with intent to commit sexual felonies and rejected an Apprendi-based challenge to a restitution fine chosen within the statutory range, affirming the judgment with only minor clerical corrections.


People v. Garcia, 224 Cal. App. 4th 519, 169 Cal. Rptr. 3d 556 (Ct. App. 4th Dist. 2014)