Confirm favorite deletion?
Criminal Law keyed to Dripps
State v. Moses
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:
Willie Joe Moses (Defendant) participated in a scam known as the “Jamaican Switch” where Defendant would approach a victim and in a faked foreign accent, ask directions to a boarding house. Defendant’s accomplice, Patricia Hard (Defendant), would then approach Defendant and offer to show him to a boarding house. Defendant would then show the victim a large sum of cash and state that he did not trust Hard. He asked the victim to hold the cash for him in a handkerchief, and to indicate good faith, for the victim to place his own money in the same handkerchief with Defendant’s money. The handkerchief was then placed in the trunk of the victim’s vehicle. Unbeknown to the victim, however, Defendant had switched the handkerchiefs with one that contained paper. Defendant and Hard would then keep the handkerchief containing all the money. Defendant was charged with violating two former Arizona statutes making it a crime to (1) obtain money by a confidence game and (2) obtaining money by means of a scheme or artifice to defraud. Defendant was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for not less than five years nor more than ten years. Defendant 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.