Confirm favorite deletion?
Criminal Law Keyed to Gershowitz
State v. Rusk
Citation:289 Md. 230, 424 A.2d 720.
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:
A 21-year-old woman, Pat, testified that on the evening of September 21, 1977, she attended a high school alumnae meeting. After the meeting, Pat and a friend agreed to drive in their respective cars to Fells Point to have a few drinks. They each had one drink and then went to a second bar, where they had another drink. They then walked to a third bar where they met the defendant. After talking, the defendant asked for a ride home, and Pat agreed.
When they arrived at defendant’s home, Pat parked on the curb on the side of the street opposite his house, but did not turn off the ignition. It was about 1:00am. Defendant asked her to come inside of his apartment, and she refused. He continued to ask, and the woman testified that she felt afraid at this point. Defendant took the keys out of the car, walked over to her side of the car, opened the door, and said, “Now will you come up?”
Pat testified that she was scared because he had her keys and she did not know what else to do, so she agreed and went inside of his apartment. When they got into defendant’s room, he said that he had to go to the bathroom and left the room for a few minutes. She did not attempt to leave. When defendant came back, he sat on the bed while she sat on a chair next to the bed. Defendant turned off the light and asked her to get on the bed with him. He started to pull her onto the bed and also began to remove her blouse. She stated that she took off her pants and removed his clothing, because he asked her to do it.
Once both undressed, Pat begged him to let her leave. She asked him: “If I do what you want, will you let me go without killing me?” She started to cry, and defendant lightly choked her. She asked the question again and he said yes. She performed oral sex and then they had sexual intercourse. Immediately after the intercourse, Pat asked if she could leave. She testified that Rusk said, “‘Yes,'” after which she got up and got dressed and Rusk returned her car keys. She reported the incident to the police at about 3:15 a.m.
According to Rusk, when they arrived in front of his apartment Pat parked the car and turned the engine off. They sat for several minutes “petting each other.” Rusk denied switching off the ignition and removing the keys. He said that they walked to the apartment house and proceeded up the stairs to his room. Rusk testified that Pat came willingly to his room and that at no time did he make threatening facial expressions. Once inside his room, Rusk left Pat alone for several minutes while he used the bathroom down the hall. Upon his return, he switched the light on but immediately turned it off because Pat, who was seated in the dark in a chair next to the bed, complained it was too bright. Rusk said that he sat on the bed across from Pat and they proceeded to have consensual sex. He testified that after the intercourse, Pat got “uptight” and started to cry. She told him that “You guys are all alike.”
The defendant was convicted of second degree rape. The Court of Special Appeals reversed.
- 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.