In People v. Thorn (2009) 176 Cal.App.4th 255, the defendant asserted carports were not the type of place in which people had a reasonable expectation of protection from intrusion. The appellate court, however, arrived at a different conclusion. It stated under the reasonable belief test, the question was whether the defendant's "penetration into the open carport was an entry of the building for purposes of the burglary statute. Applying the reasonable belief test, the court concluded that the open entrance to the carport marked the outer boundary of the apartment building for purposes of burglary. . . . A reasonable person certainly would believe that the carport 'enclosed an area into which a member of the general public could not pass without authorization.' Indeed, a member of the general public such as defendant had no business entering the carport at issue here. It is enclosed on three sides. It is not open at either end or in such other way that it could be reasonably viewed as a throughway or a shortcut to some point beyond. It constitutes a private, individually designated parking space in which its occupant has a possessory interest for the purpose of parking his or her vehicle as well as storing personal possessions." (Id. at p. 265.) The court's analysis was not "swayed by the fact that there was no physical barrier to the entry of the carport." (Ibid.)