The issue before the Court was whether selling stolen property through a retractable sliding tray on a pawn shop’s drive-through window satisfied the element of unlawful entry of a building as defined in the burglary statute. The Court held that when the outer boundary of a building is not self-evident from the shape and contours of the structure itself, courts must apply California’s “reasonable belief” test which legally defines the outer boundary to include, “any element that encloses an area into which a reasonable person would believe that a member of the general public could not pass without authorization.”
Shipp, Brittany L., "State v. Merlino, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 65 (Sept. 10, 2015)" (2015). Nevada Supreme Court Summaries. 920.