In People v. Quattlebaum (91 NY2d 744, 747-748, 698 NE2d 421, 675 NYS2d 585 [1998]), the Court of Appeals, noting that "in most cases, the foregoing determination will be a question of fact for the jury based on the particular situation before it," adopted a non-exhaustive list of factors for a court to consider when deciding whether a building is a dwelling. Those factors, as originally set forth in the case of People v. Sheirod (124 AD2d 14, 17, 510 NYS2d 945 [4th Dept 1987]), include "(1) whether the nature of the structure was such that it was adapted for occupancy at the time of the wrongful entry; (2) the intent of the owner to return; and, (3) whether, on the date of the entry, a person could have occupied the structure overnight" (People v. Quattlebaum, 91 NY2d at 748). In Quattlebaum, the building in question was a school with an office on the fifth floor that contained a bed that was occasionally used for overnight stays. The Court had to decide whether the school, which defendant entered through the first floor offices, was a dwelling. The Court held that such a building was not a dwelling as defined by the statute because, inter alia, "neither the building as a whole nor the fifth floor office had the customary indicia of a residence and its character or attributes" (People v. Quattlebaum, 91 NY2d at 748).