SmartBrief
0
Confirm favorite deletion?
Criminal Procedure Keyed to Dressler
Rhode Island v. Innis
Citation:
446 U.S. 291, 100 S.Ct. 1682, 64 L.Ed.2d 297.Facts
On the night of January 12, 1975, a taxi driver disappeared after being dispatched to pick up a customer. His body was discovered four days later. He had died from a shotgun blast. On January 17, 1975, shortly after midnight, the police received a telephone call from another taxicab driver who reported that he had just been robbed. From a photo array, he implicated the defendant. The same night, an officer spotted the defendant standing in the street and arrested him. The officer advised him of his Miranda rights.
Within minutes, another officer arrived at the scene of the arrest, and he also gave the defendant the Miranda warnings. Other police officers arrived and also advised the defendant of his Miranda rights. The defendant stated that he understood those rights and wanted to speak with a lawyer. Three officers proceeded to drive the defendant to the police station. While on the way to the station, the officers started talking to each other about a missing shotgun. They talked about how there was a school for handicapped children nearby. One officer said “God forbid one of them might find a weapon with shells and they might hurt themselves.” Another officer said that it was a safety factor and that they should continue to search for the weapon and try to find it as a little girl may shoot herself.
The defendant then interrupted the conversation, stating that the officers should turn the car around so he could show them where the gun was located. The police vehicle returned to the scene of the arrest where a search for the shotgun was in progress. An officer again advised the defendant of his Miranda rights. The defendant replied that he understood those rights but that he “wanted to get the gun out of the way because of the kids in the area in the school.” The defendant then led the police to a nearby field, where he pointed out the shotgun under some rocks by the side of the road. The shotgun was connected to the first taxicab driver’s death.
Before trial, the defendant moved to suppress the shotgun and the statements he had made to the police regarding it. The trial court denied it, and he was found guilty. The Supreme Court of Rhode Island reversed and set aside the conviction. The state appealed.
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.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.
6m 59s
