SmartBrief
0
Confirm favorite deletion?
Criminal Law Keyed to Lee
Regina v. Cunningham
Citation:
41 Crim.App. 155, 3 Q.B. 396, 2 All. Eng. Rep. 412
ProfessorScott Caron
CaseCast™ – "What you need to know"
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:
The defendant was engaged. The couple planned to move into a house next door to the defendant’s mother in law, Sarah Wade, after marriage. The houses used to be connected, but a wall had been erected to divide the cellars of the two houses.
The defendant, in an attempt to steal from the gas meter, tore it along with the gas pipes off the wall from Sarah Wade’s house. The defendant did not turn off the gas, and a “very considerable” volume of gas escaped. This gas partially asphyxiated Sarah Wade, who was asleep in her bedroom at the time.
The defendant was charged under section 23 of the Offences Against the Person Act of 1861. The question for the jury was whether the defendant’s acts were malicious within the meaning of the act. The judge told the jury that “malicious” means wicked. The jury returned a guilty verdict. He appealed, arguing that the judge misdirected the jury as to the meaning of the word “maliciously.”
- 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.
15m 13s
