(a) Offense with Intent to Commit Felony or Larceny; Punishment. - Any person who breaks or enters any building with intent to commit any felony or larceny therein shall be punished as a Class H felon.
(a1) Offense with Intent to Terrorize or Injure; Punishment. - Any person who breaks or enters any building with intent to terrorize or injure an occupant of the building is guilty of a Class H felony.
(b) Offense Generally; Punishment. - Any person who wrongfully breaks or enters any building is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.
(b1) Offense Involving Unlawful Business Entry. - Any person who, with the intent to commit an unlawful act, enters any area of a building (i) that is commonly reserved for personnel of a commercial business where money or other property is kept or (ii) clearly marked with a sign that indicates to the public that entry is forbidden is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor for a first offense and a Class I felony for a second or subsequent offense.
(b2) Enhancement. - If a person possessed a firearm about his or her person during the commission of an offense under this section, in addition to any other sentence enhancement required by law, the person shall be sentenced at a class level one class higher than the principal offense for which the person was convicted. An indictment or information for the offense shall allege in that indictment or information the facts that qualify the offense for an enhancement under this subsection. One pleading is sufficient for all offenses that are tried at a single trial.
(c) Definition. - As used in this section, "building" shall be construed to include any dwelling, dwelling house, uninhabited house, building under construction, building within the curtilage of a dwelling house, and any other structure designed to house or secure within it any activity or property. (1874-5, c. 166; 1879, c. 323; Code, s. 996; Rev., s. 3333; C.S., s. 4235; 1955, c. 1015; 1969, c. 543, s. 3; 1979, c. 760, s. 5; 1979, 2nd Sess., c. 1316, s. 47; 1981, c. 63, s. 1; c. 179, s. 14; 1993, c. 539, s. 26; 1994, Ex. Sess., c. 24, s. 14(c); 2013-95, s. 1; 2025-71, ss. 4(a), 10(d).)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
348
cases (
22 in the last 5 years), 1946–2026 · leading case:
State v. Gardner, 340 S.E.2d 701 (N.C. 1986).
State v. Gardner, 340 S.E.2d 701 (N.C. 1986).
· cites it 14× “§ 14-53), breaking or entering (N.C.G.S. § 14-54), or burglary involving the use of explosives (N.”
State v. McNair, 799 S.E.2d 631 (N.C. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 17× “" N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-54 (c) (2015). Based on the manner in which N.”
State v. Gamble, 286 S.E.2d 804 (N.C. Ct. App. 1982).
· cites it 32× “The sole question for our review is whether a "fenced-in area" is a "building" within the meaning of G.S. 14-54, "[b]reaking or entering buildings generally.”
United States v. Harvey Mungro, Jr., 754 F.3d 267 (4th Cir. 2014).
· cites it 10× “If this is the case, Mungro contends that the elements of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-54 (a) remain broader than those of the generic definition of burglary because the generic definition contains no such caveat.”
State v. Norman, 562 S.E.2d 453 (N.C. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 12× “Defendant was indicted and tried on five charges: (1) felonious breaking and entering, pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-54 (a) (1999); (2) felonious larceny, pursuant to N.”
State v. Freeman, 333 S.E.2d 743 (N.C. 1985).
· cites it 12× “N.C.Gen.Stat. § 14-54 (1981) makes it a crime to "break or enter any building with intent to commit any felony or larceny therein.”
United States v. Frank Dodge, 963 F.3d 379 (4th Cir. 2020).
· cites it 6× “575, 598 (1990), to be the “unlawful or unprivileged entry into, or remaining in, a building or other structure, with intent to commit a crime” and that the North Carolina breaking and entering statute uses virtually the same language, providing that “[a]ny person who breaks or…”
State v. Reid, 434 S.E.2d 193 (N.C. 1993).
· cites it 12× “The trial court overruled the objection and the Court of Appeals affirmed.”
State v. Bacon, 803 S.E.2d 402 (N.C. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 17× “" N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-54 (a) (2015). Although all of the stolen items were taken from Ms.”
State v. Haymond, 691 S.E.2d 108 (N.C. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 14× “Felonious Breaking or Entering of a building occupied by William Pelón in violation of N.C.G.S. § 14-54(a). Count II. Felonious Larceny of William Pelon’s property pursuant to the breaking or entering in violation of N.”
State v. Jones, 655 S.E.2d 915 (N.C. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 13× “N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-54 (2005) specifically requires the following: (a) Any person who breaks or enters any building with intent to commit any felony or larceny therein shall be punished as a Class H felon.”
United States v. Thompson, 588 F.3d 197 (4th Cir. 2009).
· cites it 9× “3d at 284 , that a violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-54 (a) was a violent felony for purposes of ACCA, had been abrogated by the Supreme Court’s decision in Begay .”
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-54(A) — 2 cases
State v. McNair, 799 S.E.2d 631 (N.C. Ct. App. 2017).
“" N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-54 (c) (2015). Based on the manner in which N.”
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-54(a) — 80 cases
State v. Haymond, 691 S.E.2d 108 (N.C. Ct. App. 2010).
“Felonious Breaking or Entering of a building occupied by William Pelón in violation of N.C.G.S. § 14-54(a). Count II. Felonious Larceny of William Pelon’s property pursuant to the breaking or entering in violation of N.”
United States v. Harvey Mungro, Jr., 754 F.3d 267 (4th Cir. 2014).
“If this is the case, Mungro contends that the elements of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-54 (a) remain broader than those of the generic definition of burglary because the generic definition contains no such caveat.”
United States v. Thompson, 588 F.3d 197 (4th Cir. 2009).
“3d at 284 , that a violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-54 (a) was a violent felony for purposes of ACCA, had been abrogated by the Supreme Court’s decision in Begay .”
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-54(a1) — 1 case
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-54(b) — 25 cases
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-54(c) — 11 cases
State v. Gamble, 286 S.E.2d 804 (N.C. Ct. App. 1982).
“The sole question for our review is whether a "fenced-in area" is a "building" within the meaning of G.S. 14-54, "[b]reaking or entering buildings generally.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.