Confirm favorite deletion?
Criminal Law keyed to Dripps
State v. Realina
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:
MarcelinoRealina (Defendant) was having an affair with the wife of Steve Hardisty. On a couple of occasions, Hardisty telephoned Defendant and threatened to kill him if he did not stop seeing his wife. Shortly thereafter, Hardisty and his wife separated in contemplation of divorce. One evening, Hardisty saw Defendant driving and got upset because he believed Defendant was going to see his estranged wife. Defendant saw Hardisty and drove into a police station parking lot and both men parked their cars. Hardisty got out of his car and began verbally threatening Defendant who sat silent in his vehicle. After a while, Defendant started his car’s engine and prepared to drive away. To prevent him from leaving, Hardisty reached into Defendant’s car and grabbed his shirt. Defendant turned off the engine and Hardisty let Defendant go. Defendant found a cane knife and got out of the car with it and chased Hardisty into the police station. Once inside, Hardisty told a police officer that a man was trying to kill him. The officer saw Defendant running toward the station, with the cane knife held in an upward position. The officer ordered Defendant to immediately drop the knife and Defendant complied. Defendant was charged with terroristic threatening in violation of HRS § 707-715(a) and was convicted and sentenced to thirty-days confinement. 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.