Confirm favorite deletion?
Criminal Law keyed to Dripps
State v. Bowen
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:
On a cold night in December 1994, Travis W. Bowen (Defendant) broke into the Whites’s home to warm himself up. He was under the influence of methamphetamines at the time of the incident. The Whites alerted family members of the break-in, and these family members alerted the police. When the police arrived at the scene, Defendant was holding two knives. Defendant testified that he had the knives out to protect himself. One of the officers testified that Defendant told him that Defendant had opened one of the knives prior to entering the house. Defendant was convicted of aggravated burglary, possession of methamphetamine, and possession of marijuana. The jury based the aggravated burglary conviction on both Defendant’s possession of methamphetamines and aggravated assault. Defendant appealed his aggravated burglary conviction, arguing that there was insufficient evidence to establish that he intended to commit a felony in the Whites’s house.
- 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.