People v. Rojos

In People v. Rojos (1995) 31 Cal.App.4th 611, the victim was living in a cabin owned by others and there was substantial evidence she was there without their permission. (Id. at pp. 612, 614-615.) Nonetheless, the court rejected the defendant's contention that he was not guilty of first degree burglary because it found "that the 'inhabited building' distinction between first and second degree burglary is designed to protect the personal safety of the 'inhabitants,'" regardless of whether the inhabitant was a squatter or trespasser who had no possessory right to the cabin. (Rojos, at pp. 614-615.)