Confirm favorite deletion?
Criminal Procedure Keyed to Ohlin
Giglio v. United States
Citation:405 U.S. 150 (1972)
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:
The controversy at issue centers around the testimony of Robert Taliento, petitioner’s alleged co-conspirator in the offense and the only witness linking petitioner with the crime. The Government’s evidence at trial showed that in June 1966 officials at the Manufacturers Hanover Trust Co. discovered that Taliento, as teller at the bank, had several cashed forged money orders. Upon questioning by FBI agents, he confessed supplying petitioner with one of the bank’s customer signature cards used by Giglio to forge $2,300 in money orders. Taliento related this story to the grand jury and petitioner was indicted; thereafter, he was named as a co-conspirator with petitioner but was not indicted. At trial, however, the Government stated that Taliento received no promises that he would not be indicted despite an affidavit filed by the Government that confirms petitioner’s claim that a promise was made to Taliento by one assistant, DiPaola, that if he testified before the jury he would not be prosecuted. Petitioner moved for new trial based on newly discovered evidence.
- 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.