Confirm favorite deletion?
Criminal Law keyed to Dripps
United States v. Burrows
Facts
A man nicknamed “Bugsy,” who was working as a confidential informant for the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), contacted Ronald Olen Burrows (Defendant) and informed him that he had a prospective buyer of five pounds of methamphetamine if Defendant wanted to sell the drugs. Defendant agreed, but was not aware that the “purchaser” was an undercover DEA agent. Defendant traveled to meet his co-defendant, Rodriguez, and obtained the drugs. After Bugsy and Defendant met at an agreed-upon time and place, they both met the agent acting as the “purchaser,” Steve Youngblood, in a parking lot. Once Defendant produced the methamphetamine, he was arrested. Defendant attempted to convince the agents that he too was working undercover for Riverside County Deputy Sheriff Kenneth Vann to arrest Rodriguez. At the request of DEA agents, Defendant contacted Rodriguez and instructed him to come to the parking lot to assist in the transaction. Rodriguez and two others were arrested upon their arrival at that location. The government did not believe Defendant’ story about working undercover and prosecuted him as well as Rodriguez and another. At trial, Defendant testified that he had been working for Deputy Vann. However, Vann testified that he had visited Defendant in jail, at Defendant’ request, and had asked him to target Rodriguez but that Defendant had never worked for him as an informant, never paged him during the transaction in question, and was not working for him at the time of the transaction. The district court instructed the jury on the defense of public authority. The jury rejected Defendant’ defense and convicted him of possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine and conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine and conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine. Defendant appealed.
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.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.