Criminal Law keyed to Dripps
Burrows v. State
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:
When he was eighteen years old, Richard N. Burrows (Defendant) and a friend, Milton Drucker, left their military school in Wisconsin to travel across the country. With $55 in cash, the boys left in a car belonging to Drucker’s parents and headed west. When they had reached Phoenix, Arizona, they were stopped by the police at the request of Drucker’s parents. Drucker’s mother claimed Milton and left the state. Defendant’s adoptive parents, in an effort to teach him a lesson, left him in Phoenix to fend for himself. In an effort to return to his hometown of Chicago, Defendant hopped onto a train and made it as far as Aguila, Arizona. There, Defendant learned that he was heading in the wrong direction, towards Los Angeles, California. Defendant was able to get a ride from Jack Martin who was heading to Phoenix. While en route to Phoenix, Martin began drinking. When they had stopped at a gas station about fifty-five miles from Phoenix, the attendant suggested that Defendant drive because Martin appeared to be too intoxicated. Martin agreed. Defendant had driven the vehicle a few miles before shooting and killing Martin. Defendant took money from Martin, hid his body in a creek and drove on to Phoenix. Defendant was later apprehended in Denver, Colorado and returned to Arizona. Defendant was charged with first-degree murder. At trial, Defendant testified that shortly after leaving Aguila, Martin had forced Defendant to drink liquor and if he refused, that Martin would not drive him to Phoenix. Defendant said he feared being left on the side of the road and thus complied. At the time of the shooting, Defendant testified that he was so dazed due to the liquor he had consumed that he did not realize he had shot Martin. Defendant was found guilty of first-degree murder, sentenced to death, 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.