Confirm favorite deletion?
Criminal Law Keyed to Johnson
State v. Pacheco
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:
Herbert Pacheco (Defendant) boasted to Thomas Dillon, his coworker, about his involvement in criminal activities, including performing hits. Dillon learned that Defendant was a deputy sheriff and contacted the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), volunteering to inform on Defendant. Law enforcement devised a plan in which Dillon called Defendant and asked to meet to discuss a deal. Pursuant to the plan, Dillon offered to pay Defendant to offer protection during a drug deal. Defendant agreed. Later, Dillon told Defendant that he had been cheated out of money during the deal and asked Defendant to handle the situation. Defendant offered to kill the buyer. Defendant was to call the buyer down to a motel lobby and shoot him. Defendant went to the lobby with a loaded gun but did not call the buyer down. As Defendant left the motel, he was arrested. Defendant was charged with conspiracy to commit murder, attempted murder, and two counts of conspiracy to deliver a controlled substance. Under Washington’s conspiracy statute, a person is guilty of conspiracy when: (1) with the intent that conduct constituting a crime be performed, the person agrees with one or more persons to engage in the conduct and (2) any one of the persons takes a substantial step in furtherance of the agreement. The jury acquitted Defendant of attempted murder but convicted Defendant on all other counts. Defendant appealed, arguing that he had not committed conspiracy, as no genuine bilateral agreement existed between Defendant and Dillon as required by the conspiracy statute.
- 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.