Confirm favorite deletion?
Criminal Law keyed to Dripps
Mosby v. Senkowski
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:
Witnesses saw a man known as “Florida” shoot and kill two men. Days later, police arrested Marcus Mosby (Defendant) for selling drugs. Officers arrived at a house without a warrant. After attempting to coax Defendant out, the officers entered and arrested Defendant. While Defendant was in a police car, a neighbor asked what the officers wanted with “Florida,” referring to Defendant. Officers presented a photo array to the murder witnesses, who identified Defendant as the killer. After being read his rights and declining an attorney, Defendant confessed. Defendant was indicted for homicide. Before trial, Defendant moved to suppress the confession and photo identification on the ground that his warrantless arrest violated the Fourth Amendment. The trial court held that Defendant lacked standing to assert a Fourth Amendment claim since he had no “expectation of privacy,” because he did not live in the home. The motion was denied, and Defendant was convicted. On appeal, Defendant’s attorney did not challenge the suppression ruling. Defendant applied for a writ of coram nobis to vacate the conviction due to ineffective assistance of counsel. The appellate division denied the application, and Defendant petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus in federal court. The district court denied the writ, and Defendant appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
- 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.
- The Brief Prologue closes the case brief with important forward-looking discussion and includes:
- Policy: Identifies the Policy if any that has been established by the case.
- Court Direction: Shares where the Court went from here for this case.