Confirm favorite deletion?
Criminal Procedure Keyed to Ohlin
Berkemer v. McCarty
Citation:468 U.S. 420 (1984)
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:
On March 31, 1980, Trooper Williams of the Ohio Highway Patrol observed respondent’s car weaving in and out of a lane on Interstate Highway 270. After following the car, Williams forced respondent to stop and asked him to get out of the vehicle. When respondent complied, Williams concluded that respondent would be charged with a traffic offense and therefore, his freedom to leave the scene was terminated. However, respondent was not told that he would be taken into custody. William asked respondent whether he had been using intoxicants. Respondent relied that he had consumed two beers. Williams thereupon placed respondent under arrest and transported him to the county jail, where Williams resumed questioning respondent to obtain information for inclusion in the State Highway Patrol Alcohol Influence Report. At no point did Williams tell respondent that he had a right to remain silent and to consult with an attorney.
- 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.