Confirm favorite deletion?
Criminal Law Keyed to Osler
Molino-Martinez v. United States
Citation:578 U.S. 189 (2016)
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:
At the sentencing hearing, the US Probation Office calculated defendant’s total offense level as 21. 18 of those points were due to his criminal history with 11 points coming from five aggravated burglary convictions from 2011. That resulted in a level VI and a guideline sentencing range of 77 to 96 months. Both sides agreed to 77 months.
On appeal, defendant argued that the range was wrong, and because those 5 burglaries were considered individually but the US Probation Office instead of jointly because he was charged and convicted of all 5 at the same time- they should have given him 5 points instead of 11. With the new total, he would have been at level V instead of VI and his sentencing guideline range would have been 70-87 months instead of 77-96. He argues this is a plain error because it resulted in a longer sentence than he deserved.
- 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.