The law doesn't have to be and isn't consistent. Various articles were written and amended at different times by different legislative sessions.KD5NRH wrote:I do have to wonder what caused the legislature to think it necessary to specify the entire body for criminal trespass, but "any part of the body" or "any physical ... object connected with the body" for burglary.
The burglary statute makes sense. A building has definite boundaries (doors and windows), and any attempt to cross them is evidence of intent to intrude.
Criminal tresspass applies to open land and other premises that are not always well defined. You would not want be guilty of criminal trespass because your hat blew off and you retrieved it from someone's unfenced lawn.
- Jim