Sparks entered the victim’s home with consent, to discuss magazines he was selling. He then followed her into another room of the home and raped her. He was convicted of both rape and residential burglary. The jury was instructed that a person who enters a building or any room of a building with the intent to commit rape was guilty of burglary. The appellate court here held that although entry into a room with the requisite intent may be an entry into a dwelling house which falls under the definition of first degree burglary, the jury was incorrectly instructed that entry into a room, but not the house, with the requisite intent was a first degree burglary. Therefore, had appellant entered the dwelling without the intent, and formed the intent while he was inside the building before entry into the room, the jury could have found him guilty. Since it was impossible to determine whether the jury found him guilty on the incorrect or correct theory, reversal of the residential burglary and retrial was required.