Confirm favorite deletion?
Criminal Law Keyed to Ohlin
Commonwealth v. Pestinikas
Citation:617 A.2d 1339 (1992)
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:
Joseph Kly, a 92 year old man, arranged for the defendants, Walter and Helen Pestinikas, to be his caregivers. The defendants added their names to his bank accounts and withdrew around $300 per month for several months, which Kly had agreed to pay for his care. Beginning in August 1983 until Kly’s death in November, 1984, however, the defendants withdrew much larger sums in the excess of $30,000 dollars.
On the afternoon of November 15. 1984, police and an ambulance discovered Kly’s dead body, with his ribs and sternum greatly pronounced. An autopsy revealed that he may have been dead for as many as 39 hours before his body was found, and the cause of death was starvation and dehydration.
At trial, the Commonwealth argued that after contracting to provide food, shelter, care and necessary medicine for Kly, the defendants engaged in a course of conduct calculated to deprive Kly of those things necessary to maintain life and thereby cause his death. The trial court instructed the jury that defendants could not be found guilty of a malicious killing for failing to provide food, shelter and necessary medicines to Kly unless a duty to do so had been imposed upon them by contract. They were found guilty of murder in the third degree.
- 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.