Criminal Law keyed to Dripps
People v. Beeman
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:
James Gray and Michael Burk robbed Timothy Beeman’s (Defendant) sister-in-law. Defendant was charged with aiding and abetting Gray and Burk in the robbery. Gray and Burk testified that Defendant was involved in planning the robbery, including them giving information about the layout of the victim’s house, what was inside, what to wear to be able to talk their way in, and agreeing to sell some of the stolen goods. Defendant testified that although he did give some of this information, he did not do so with an intent that Gray and Burk commit the crime. He also testified that when he was told about the robbery plan, he told Gray that he did not want to be involved. In fact, Gray’s testimony confirmed that Defendant had said before the robbery that he did not want to be a part of it. Finally, although Defendant was found with missing jewelry, he claimed that he had only taken possession of it in order to return it to his sister-in-law. Also, information from Defendant led to the initial arrest of Gray and Burk. However, Defendant was convicted of aiding and abetting Gray and Burk in the robbery. Defendant appealed on the grounds that the jury instruction did not include a requirement that Defendant intended his actions would aid in the commission of the robbery.
- 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.