Confirm favorite deletion?
Marijuana Law – Keyed to Mikos
Washington v. Gladstone
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:
Gladstone was spoke to Douglas MacArthur Thompson, without knowing he was an agent of the police, and told him that he knew someone, Kent, who might be willing to sell him marijuana. Gladstone did not know the Kent’s address, however, he sketched him directions to his location. Thompson went to Kent’s residence and bought marijuana. Subsequently, Kent was arrested and convicted of selling Thompson approximately eight ounces of marijuana, and Gladstone was found guilty of aiding and abetting Kent in the unlawful sale of marijuana. At trial, Thompson did not testify that that Gladstone had previously interacted with Kent, that Kent and Gladstone were working together, or any conduct that one can infer that Gladstone was connected to Kent’s marijuana sale. Moreover, Gladstone, at trial, testified that he knew where Kent lived because he was a student at his university, and he drove him home one day from the student union. Additionally, Gladstone testified that the encounter with Thompson occurred differently. Gladstone indicated that Thompson asked him if he knew Kent, before Gladstone even mentioned his name.
- 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.