Confirm favorite deletion?
Professional Responsibility Keyed to Hazard
Nix v. Whiteside
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:
An altercation involving Whiteside (Defendant) resulted in the stabbing death of another. Before testifying, Defendant told his attorney that he planned to state that he had seen a gun in the decedent’s hand, even though previously he had stated the opposite. The attorney informed Defendant he would be committing perjury to do so, which he could not allow. The attorney told Defendant that if he testified falsely, the attorney would inform the court of Defendant’s perjury. Defendant did not testify falsely, and he was convicted of murder. He appealed, arguing that counsel’s threats to expose his perjury constituted a denial of counsel under the Sixth Amendment. This conviction was affirmed. Whiteside (Defendant) petitioned for habeas corpus in the district court. This was denied. The court of appeals reversed, agreeing with Whiteside’s (Defendant) contention. The Supreme Court granted review.
- 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.