Confirm favorite deletion?
Criminal Law Keyed to Lee
State v. Fridley
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:
Fridley was pulled over for speeding and during a routine check, officers discovered that Fridley’s license had been revoked, which was a strict liability offense. At trial, Fridley sought to introduce evidence, which the prosecution objected to, that depicted a telephone conversation he had with an employee of the drivers license division. Fridley testified that the employee told him that he would have to take a drivers test, forward the appropriate documentation and payment to the division, if Fridley was to obtain a work permit to drive. Fridley was told that he would be without a license for seven days, which Fridley interpreted to mean that he was permitted to drive during this period. Fridley sought to introduce this evidence in support of his defense of mistake of law but the trial court sustained the prosecution’s objection to admittance of the evidence, because it was hearsay and denied his request the jury be instructed on a mistake of law defense. Fridley 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.
- 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.