In People v. Kwok (1998) 63 Cal. App. 4th 1236, 1246-1247 75 Cal. Rptr. 2d 40 at pages 1246-1248, the court followed the People v. Ortega (1992) court's rejection of temporal and spatial proximity as elements of burglary, noting that "the 'continuous transaction test' and the 'immediate vicinity test' . . . are artifacts of the particular factual contexts of Wright and other cases ascribing thereto." Finding "no principled way to distinguish extortion from other felonies or from larceny in the context of an intent to burglarize," we held that a burglary may be found "if the facts and circumstances of the case permit a reasonable inference that the entry was made in order to facilitate commission of the subsequent crime, even though the entry and the subsequent crime 'may not share the attributes of proximity in time and place.' " (Kwok, supra, at p. 1247, italics added, quoting Ortega, supra, at p. 695.)