Confirm favorite deletion?
Criminal Law keyed to Dripps
State v. Iten
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:
Raymond Iten (Defendant) was driving his tractor-trailer truck on a highway. As he neared an intersection, Defendant observed the traffic light switch from green to yellow and then to red when he was about 320 feet from the intersection. Defendant believed he could not stop safely in time so he honked his horn to alert other cars. Defendant noticed another car driven by MarnaQuarnstrom entering the intersection. Although Defendant attempted to miss Quarnstrom’s vehicle, the truck’s front bumper hit her car. Quarnstrom was killed when she was thrown from her vehicle and struck by Defendant’s truck. Defendant immediately stopped the truck and remained at the scene. Defendant was subsequently charged with criminal vehicular operation resulting in death. At trial, evidence showed that Defendant has not maintained the truck’s brakes as required by federal and state law. Evidence also showed that Defendant could have stopped the truck in time. Defendant testified that he did not stop because he was afraid that the load would shift, the brakes would lock or catch fire, or that the truck would jack-knife. Defendant was convicted and he appealed.
- 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.