6. Which of the following is true?

D is correct. The neighbor is not criminally responsible for the pickpocket's theft, and the neighbor had permission to be in the residence. Since the neighbor was given permission to watch the house, and without additional facts, the neighbor cannot be presumed to have exceeded the scope of his authority. Therefore, the neighbor is not guilty of any crime. The pickpocket, however, took the owner's property, without the owner's consent, put it in his pocket, and is thus guilty of larceny.

While trespass is mostly taught in the context of tort law, this question is classified under criminal law. A hint that this is a criminal law question is that the answer choices each use the word «guilty,» which is a term that will appear in criminal law questions. On the contrary, if it was a torts question the answer choices would generally use the word «liable» instead of «guilty.»

A is incorrect. Neither the neighbor nor the pickpocket committed a burglary. At common law, burglary is defined as the breaking and entering into a dwelling of another, at nighttime, with the intent to commit a felony therein. The neighbor had the owner's permission to be in the residence, and there is no evidence that the neighbor had the intent to commit a felony or theft in the residence. The neighbor is not guilty of burglary. Likewise, the pickpocket had permission to be in the residence and, since he was invited into the dwelling, there is no evidence that the pickpocket broke into the house. There is also no evidence that the pickpocket entered the party with the intent to commit a felony or a theft.

B is incorrect. The neighbor did not commit burglary and is not criminally responsible for the pickpocket's actions. He did not have the intent that the larceny occur and he did not knowingly aid and abet the pickpocket in the commission of the crime. However, the pickpocket did take and carry away the owner's rings with the intent to deprive the owner of them, and he is thus guilty of larceny.

C is incorrect. The neighbor did not commit a trespass. A criminal trespass occurs when a defendant does any of the following: (i) intentionally enters a person's land without permission; (ii) intentionally remains on the person's land without the right to be there; or (iii) intentionally puts an object on the person's land without permission. However, a defendant will not be guilty of trespass if he is privileged. The privilege implicated in this fact pattern is «consent.» A defendant's action is privileged if the entry to the land is with the consent of the person who has rightful and legal possession of the land. The action becomes trespass if it is beyond the scope of the consent of the rightful owner. Consent can be implied from custom, usage or conduct.

Here, the neighbor had permission to be in the residence by the owner. The owner's consent was not limited by time or day or reason for being in the house. This constitutes a privilege of consent, so the neighbor being present in the house cannot be a trespass. The pickpocket is guilty of larceny, but the neighbor committed no crime.