Civil Procedure Keyed to Cound
Sell v. United States
Only StudyBuddy Pro offers the complete Case Brief Anatomy*
Access the most important case brief elements for optimal case understanding.
*Case Brief Anatomy includes: Brief Prologue, Complete Case Brief, Brief Epilogue
- The Brief Prologue provides necessary case brief introductory information and includes:
- Topic: Identifies the topic of law and where this case fits within your course outline.
- Parties: Identifies the cast of characters involved in the case.
- Procedural Posture & History: Shares the case history with how lower courts have ruled on the matter.
- Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.: A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.
- Case Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises: Identifies and Defines Legal Authority used in this case.
- The Case Brief is the complete case summarized and authored in the traditional Law School I.R.A.C. format. The Pro case brief includes:
- Brief Facts: A Synopsis of the Facts of the case.
- Rule of Law: Identifies the Legal Principle the Court used in deciding the case.
- Facts: What are the factual circumstances that gave rise to the civil or criminal case? What is the relationship of the Parties that are involved in the case. Review the Facts of this case here:
The Petitioner, Charles Sell (the “Petitioner”), has a history of mental illness. The Petitioner was charged with submitting fictitious insurance claims for payment. A Federal Magistrate judge ordered the Petitioner to undergo a psychiatric examination. The Petitioner was deemed “currently competent”, but at risk to suffer “a psychotic episode” sometime in the future. The Petitioner was released on bail. A superseding indictment was produced charging the Petitioner with various counts of fraud and one mount of money laundering. During the proceedings, the government claimed that the Petitioner sought to intimidate a witness and as a result his bail was revoked. The Petitioner was then indicted for attempting to murder the FBI agent that arrested him and an individual who was going to testify against him. The cases were joined for trial. The Petitioner thereafter asked the Magistrate to reconsider his competence. The magistrate found that the Petitioner was incompetent to stand trial. The magistrate was ordered to “be hospitalized for treatment for four months”. The state hospital where Petitioner was being treated recommended that the Petitioner take antipsychotic medication, but the Petitioner refused to do so. The state sought to force the Petitioner to take the medicine against his will. The District Court found that that magistrate judge was correct in ruling that the hospital should permit the Petitioner’s involuntary medication. The Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court’s findings that the Petitioner was not dangerous. Also, that the Petitioner could be involuntarily medicated. The Supreme Court granted certiori.
- Issue(s): Lists the Questions of Law that are raised by the Facts of the case.
- Holding: Shares the Court's answer to the legal questions raised in the issue.
- Concurring / Dissenting Opinions: Includes valuable concurring or dissenting opinions and their key points.
- Reasoning and Analysis: Identifies the chain of argument(s) which led the judges to rule as they did.