Criminal Law Keyed to Johnson
State v. Leidholm
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:
Leidholm (Defendant) was in an unhappy marriage with Chester, her husband, in which both parties abused alcohol and engaged in violent behavior. As the couple returned home from a party at which both of them had been drinking heavily, the two started an argument, which turned into a fight. Chester prevented Defendant from calling a deputy sheriff and repeatedly pushed her to the ground. After the fight stopped and they had gone to bed, Defendant got up, went to the kitchen, took a butcher knife, and stabbed Chester to death. Defendant was charged with murder and tried in the McLean County Court. At her trial, Defendant claimed that she had acted in self-defense and introduced expert testimony that she suffered from battered woman syndrome. The court refused Defendant’s request for an instruction that this syndrome could be relevant to the issue of self-defense. The court instead instructed the jury that self-defense under North Dakota law applied only if a reasonably prudent person in similar circumstances would have reasonably believed that Chester was about to kill her or inflict serious bodily harm. Defendant was convicted of manslaughter. 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.