Confirm favorite deletion?
Criminal Law Keyed to Lee
State v. Wanrow
Citation:88 Wash.2d 221, 559 P.2d 548 (1977)
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:
Defendant’s two children were staying at the home of Ms. Hooper, a friend of the defendant. Defendant’s son told Ms. Hooper that a man tried to pull him off his bike and drag him into the house. Months earlier, Ms. Hooper’s own child had been molested but she had been unable to persuade her child to tell her who molested her. A few minutes after the defendant’s son told his story to Ms. Hooper, Mr. Wesler showed up at Hooper’s door and said “I didn’t touch the kid.” At that moment, Ms. Hooper’s child said that that was the man who molested her. Ms. Hooper called the police, but the police told her they cold not arrest him until Monday morning.
Ms. Hooper told the defendant about what happened. The defendant arrived at Ms. Hooper’s house with a pistol in her handbag. The two women decided that they were too afraid to stay alone and decided to call the defendant’s sister and brother in law to sleep over. There were eight young children in the house and four adults. At around 5am, the brother in law went to the Wesler residence and accused him of molesting children. Mr. Wesler suggested that they go to the Hooper residence and get the whole situation straightened out. They went back to the Hooper house together, and Mr. Wesler went inside while the brother in law stayed outside.
Once Wesler entered the house, a good deal of shouting took place. This woke up one of the children and Mr. Wesler approached the child and said: “My what a cute little boy.” The defendant shot Wesler. Ms. Hooper called the police and told them that a guy broke in and her friend shot him.
At trial, the jury was instructed that in evaluating the gravity of the danger to the respondent to determine if she acted in self-defense, they should consider only those acts and circumstances occurring “at or immediately before the killing.”
- 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.