Confirm favorite deletion?
Marijuana Law – Keyed to Mikos
Alaska v. Crocker
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:
Leo Richardson Crocker Jr., Defendant, was found with marijuana plants, harvested marijuana, and marijuana-growing equipment when the police entered his home to execute a search warrant. The warrant application alleged that the officer smelled a “strong odor” of marijuana growing inside the house as they stood on the front door. The officer believed that the strong odor of marijuana correlated with the amount of marijuana that would be found inside. Thus, the officer assumed, because it was a strong smell of marijuana, a large amount of marijuana would be found inside. Likewise, the officer looked into the amount of electricity the residence used and, according to the Homer Electric Association, the residence was using more electricity than average, based on the size of the residence. The superior court concluded that the warrant was invalid and the evidence should be suppressed.
- 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.