SmartBrief
Confirm favorite deletion?
Criminal Law Keyed to Gershowitz
State v. Bugely
Citation:
408 N.W.2d 394.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:
On September 14, 1985, defendant entered into a rental agreement with National to rent a car until September 16, 1985. He did not return the car on September 16, 1985. He called National twice and the agreement was extended first until September 20, 1985, and then until September 27, 1985. Defendant did not return the rental car on September 27, 1985, and did not contact National after that date.
National telephoned defendant’s mother, the number defendant had given National to reach him. She said defendant was not there and she did not know when he would return. The defendant did not return National’s call. National filed a criminal complaint and the police arrested the defendant on October 12, 1985. The rental car was recovered.
The defendant was convicted of theft. He appealed, arguing that the state failed to prove that defendant’s retention of the car was inconsistent with the owner’s rights in the property.
- 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.