Criminal Law Keyed to Johnson
United States v. Sutherland
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:
Glen Sutherland (Defendant) was a judge at the Municipal Court of the City of El Paso. Edward Maynard and Grace Walker (Defendants) agreed to collect traffic tickets and the associated fines, as well as a $10 premium, from Sutherland’s friends. Maynard and Walker gave the tickets to Sutherland, who then favorably disposed of the tickets. The collected money was split between Sutherland and whichever defendant collected the ticket. Walker and Sutherland participated in the scheme between 1975 and 1977, while Maynard and Sutherland worked together in 1979. All three defendants were indicted for willfully combining to conspire to violate § 1962(c) of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. Although the indictment was based on a single agreement among all three defendants, the government did not present any evidence establishing an agreement between Walker and Maynard. Defendants were convicted and appealed. The government contended that a single conspiracy to violate RICO could consist of a pattern of agreements that, before RICO, would comprise multiple conspiracies. The government argued that the prosecution was therefore not required to prove any connection between Walker and Maynard, as the two conspiracies both involved the same RICO enterprise of the Municipal Court of the City of El Paso.
- 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.