Confirm favorite deletion?
Criminal Procedure Keyed to Dressler
McNeil v. Wisconsin
Citation:501 U.S. 171, 111 S.Ct. 2204, 115 L.Ed.2d 158.
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 defendant was arrested in Nebraska pursuant to a warrant charging him with an armed robbery that occurred in West Allis, Wisconsin. Once back in Wisconsin, the defendant was brought into court and a public defender was appointed to him. Later that evening, a detective visited the defendant in jail. The detective was investigating a murder in the town of Caledonia, in which the defendant was a suspect. It was unrelated to the armed robbery he was arrested for. The detective advised the defendant of his Miranda rights, and the defendant signed a form waiving them. In this first interview, the defendant did not deny knowledge of the Caledonia crimes, but said that he had not been involved.
The detective returned two days later with more detectives. He again advised the defendant of his Miranda rights and provided a waiver form that the defendant signed. This time, the defendant admitted that he had been involved in the Caledonia crimes and described them in detail. He also implicated two other men, Willie Pope and Lloyd Crowley.
The detective returned two days later, having in the meantime questioned Pope, who convinced them that he had not been involved in the crimes. They advised the defendant of the Miranda warnings and obtained his signature and initials on the waiver form. The defendant admitted that he had lied about Pope’s involvement to minimize his own role in the Caledonia crimes and provided another statement recounting the events, which was transcribed, signed, and initialed.
The defendant was convicted after a trial for the murder. He appealed, arguing that his incriminating statements should have been excluded as the Sixth Amendment right to counsel attached during the judicial proceeding for the West Allis armed robbery, and thus, he should not have been questioned about the Caledonia crimes without counsel.
- 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.