Confirm favorite deletion?
Criminal Law Keyed to Gershowitz
State v. Johnson
Citation:123 N.M. 640, 944 P.2d 869.
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 convicted of two counts of aggravated assault and criminal penetration, and one count of false imprisonment. The charges stemmed from two separate incidents. The State contended that the Defendant enticed T.A. to enter his car by indicating that he was a law enforcement officer and needed to speak to her, and on a different occasion, he offered T.S. a ride, which she accepted. After each woman entered his car, he drove her to a secluded area where he assaulted and raped her.
The Defendant argued that he approached each woman believing her to be a prostitute, and that during the course of consensual acts that the Defendant paid for, he did things which annoyed, angered and, in some ways, frightened these women. Defense counsel filed a motion in limine asking the court to consider the admissibility of evidence of the prior sexual conduct of the alleged victims and evidence that one alleged victim had worked as a prostitute in the past. The State opposed the motion and filed its own motion in limine seeking to preclude evidence of any sexual conduct by any victim with any person other than the defendant and any reference to any alleged illicit sexual activity performed by any victim in this case. The Court denied the Defendant’s motion and granted the State’s motion.
The Court of Appeals reversed Defendant’s convictions. It argued that the evidence in question should have been admitted for the purpose of showing possible motive to fabricate. The Court of Appeals also stated that the rape shield law does not prevent the public disclosure of the acts of individuals who make themselves available for commercial sex.
- 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.