Defenses to Burglary of a Conveyance in Florida

July 8, 2025 Don Pumphrey, Jr. Criminal Defense, Theft/Property Crimes Social Share

In Florida, burglary of a conveyance is a very serious enhanceable felony offense. This blog will discuss the offense of burglary of a conveyance in Florida and potential defenses if someone is charged with this crime.

Under Fla. Stat. Section 810.02, burglary is defined as entering or remaining in a dwelling, structure or conveyance with the intent to commit a criminal offense therein unless the premises are open to the public or the defendant is licensed to enter or remain. 

Burglary in a conveyance is a form of burglary that occurs in any of the following, which are classified as conveyances under Florida law (Fla. Stat. Section 810.011(3)): 

• Motor vehicle (car or truck)
• Ship or vessel
• Railroad vehicle or car (train)
• Trailer
• Aircraft
• Camper
• Sleeping car 

For someone to be found guilty of burglary in a conveyance, the State must prove all of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

• The defendant entered or attempted to enter a conveyance as defined under Florida law (entry includes any body part or an object controlled by the defendant)
• The defendant did so without the consent or permission of the owner or lawful occupant (the entry or attempted entry was unauthorized)
• The defendant had the specific intent to commit a crime once inside the conveyance (theft, vandalism, etc.)

If the conveyance is unoccupied at the time of the burglary, this offense is a third-degree felony punishable by up to 5 years in prison and a $5,000 fine. If the conveyance was occupied, this is enhanced to a second-degree felony punishable by up to 15 years in prison and a $10,000 fine.

Burglary of a conveyance is considered a first-degree felony punishable by up to 30 years in prison if any of the following are true:

• The defendant was armed or became armed during the burglary (if with a firearm, this triggers Florida’s 10-20-Life mandatory minimums)
• The defendant committed an assault or battery upon the occupant(s) of the conveyance
• The defendant used a motor vehicle to assist the burglary and caused damage as a result

When someone is charged with burglary of a conveyance, this may initially seem like a hopeless situation. However, many defenses exist to this charge, one or more of which may be applicable to a given case depending on the facts.

The first (and one of the most prominent) defenses to burglary of a conveyance is the lack of intent to commit a crime while inside the conveyance. Under Fla. Stat. Section 810.02, burglary in a conveyance does not simply require entering or remaining unlawfully (generally considered trespass in a conveyance), but also the intent to commit a crime while inside. State v. Waters, 401 So. 2d 1131 (Fla. 1981)

Another defense to the charge of burglary of a conveyance is that the defendant had the consent of the owner or possessor of the conveyance to enter or remain inside. If this is true, there is no unlawful entry. Moreover, if someone holds the title to the conveyance (owns it), they cannot unlawfully enter it as a matter of law.

An additional defense to a burglary of a conveyance charge is that no entry or attempted entry occurred. If the defendant merely stood outside, touched the door of the conveyance, or never crossed the threshold into the conveyance, this is insufficient to convict as a matter of law.

Yet another defense that may be applicable is mistaken identity. Sometimes, a burglary of a conveyance charge is brought based on grainy surveillance footage or unreliable eyewitness accounts regarding who the alleged burglar was. If there is uncertainty about who entered or attempted to enter the conveyance, a mistaken identity defense can create room for reasonable doubt.

Similar to the mistaken identity defense is the alibi defense. In a case involving an allegation of burglary of a conveyance, evidence indicating the defendant was somewhere else at the time of the charged offense can undermine the State’s case. When arguing an alibi defense, evidence such as camera footage, GPS data, and receipts can be helpful in establishing the defendant was not present.

Another defense to burglary of a conveyance is lack of participation. In some cases, an individual may be charged for being present at the scene and allegedly being affiliated with the person who is accused of committing the burglary. However, a lack of participation defense can defeat these charges if the State cannot prove active participation or aiding beyond a reasonable doubt. Dieujuste v. State, 86 So. 3d 1209 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)

An additional defense is an argument that the burglarized item does not qualify as a conveyance under Florida law. For example, if someone enters an abandoned vehicle or an object that is not designed for transport, this may not qualify. 

Another defense is entry during “open access.” This defense may be relevant in a case involving someone entering a vehicle (such as a taxi or Uber) while the door is open – without stealth – during regular access hours. Depending on the facts of the case, this defense can be used to show a lack of criminal intent.

Moreover, the necessity defense may be used in response to a burglary of a conveyance charge. Bozeman v. State, 714 So. 2d 570 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998).

Though this is often difficult to establish, as it is an affirmative defense (the defendant must show some evidence of necessity), the necessity defense applies if:

• There was an immediate urgency (serious and imminent threat to the defendant or others)
• Entry of the conveyance was the only option
• The harm avoided was greater than the harm caused

Examples may include someone breaking into a locked car during a hurricane to avoid being swept away or struck by debris, or someone entering a car to save a child or animal locked in extreme heat. 

If someone is charged with burglary of a conveyance after remaining in the vehicle (staying in the vehicle after the owner or possessor revoked permission), a viable defense may be the lack of intent to remain. In a burglary case, the State must not just prove that the defendant remained in the conveyance unlawfully – but did so to commit a crime therein.

Though there are many valid legal defenses to burglary of a conveyance, some defenses to this charge are not considered legally valid in Florida. These include:

• “I didn’t steal anything”: Burglary of a conveyance requires only the intent to commit a crime after an unauthorized entry – not the completion of the crime (such as theft). 
• “The door was unlocked”: Burglary does not require forced entry. If all the other elements of the offense are satisfied, the conveyance’s door being unlocked does not absolve a defendant of culpability.
• “I was only inside for a short time”: The duration of the unauthorized entry does not matter. Even brief unauthorized entry of a conveyance with the intent to commit another crime therein violates the statute.
• “I was drunk/on drugs”: Voluntary intoxication is not a valid defense in Florida (Fla. Stat. 775.051)
• “It was just a prank/dare”: If the entry was unauthorized and the defendant intended to commit a crime inside, this is still burglary even if it was a prank or dare.
• “I didn’t know it belonged to someone else”: As long as the property has another owner, ignorance of ownership is not a defense.
• “I didn’t go all the way in”: Even partial entry (such as a hand or a tool) is considered entry under Florida law (Von Edwards v. State, 377 So. 2d 684 (Fla. 1979))

In sum, burglary of a conveyance is an enhanceable felony offense in Florida. Depending on the facts of the case, it can be charged as anywhere from a third- to a first-degree felony, punishable by a maximum of between 5 and 30 years in prison.

If someone is accused of burglary of a conveyance, however, many defenses exist. These include lack of intent to commit a crime inside, consent to enter, lack of actual entry, mistaken identity, alibi, mere presence, no conveyance under the law, no intent to remain, and more. 

Being charged with burglary is very serious. A conviction could result in lengthy prison sentences and hefty fines. It is vital for someone facing these charges to find experienced and aggressive legal representation as soon as possible.

Criminal Defense Attorney in Tallahassee, FL

Don Pumphrey, Jr. is a Former Prosecutor, Former State Police Officer, Lifetime Member of the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers; for over 25 years as a private defense attorney who is Trusted, Experienced, Aggressive in Criminal Defense as a Trial Attorney, Criminal Lawyer, Criminal Defense Lawyer for the accused in Florida State Courts located in Tallahassee, Florida but handling cases throughout the State of Florida.

Don Pumphrey, Jr. and the Tallahassee criminal defense lawyers at Pumphrey Law have decades of experience fighting drug charges on behalf of clients and winning. Call Pumphrey Law now at (850) 681-7777 to learn more about what we can do for you. Our lawyers will be happy to provide you with a free consultation.

  Social Share