Confirm favorite deletion?
Criminal Procedure Keyed to Ohlin
Maples v. Thomas
Citation:565 U.S. 266 (2012)
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:
In 1997, Alabama charged Maples with two counts of capital murder. Maples pleaded not guilty, and his case proceeded to trial, where he was represented by two court-appointed Alabama attorneys. Neither counsel had previously tried the penalty phase of a capital case. The jury recommended that he be sentenced to death. His appeal was denied. Two New York lawyers represented Maples in post-conviction proceedings. With the aid of his New York pro bono counsel, Maples filed a petition for post-conviction relief under Alabama rule. Maples asserted that his court-appointed attorneys provided constitutionally ineffective assistance during his capital trial. The State responded by moving for summary dismissal of Maples’ petition. The trial court denied the State’s motion. Some seven months later, both New York counsels left their firm. Neither attorney told Maples of their departure or of their resulting inability to continue to represent him. In disregard of Alabama law, neither attorney sought the trial court’s leave to withdraw.
- 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.