SmartBrief
Confirm favorite deletion?
Criminal Law Keyed to Kennedy
United States of America v. Michael H. Weitzenhoff; Thomas W. Mariani
Citation:
35 F.3d 1275 (1993)Facts
The defendants were managers of the East Honolulu Community Services Sewage Treatment Plant, which is located near Sandy Beach. It operates under a permit issued pursuant to the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System, which established the limits on the Total Suspended Solids (“TSS”) and Biochemical Oxygen Demand (“BOD”) – indicators of the solid and organic matter, respectively, in the effluent discharged at Sandy Beach. During the period in question, the permit limited the discharge of both the TSS and BOD to an average of 976 pounds per day over a 30-day period. It also imposed monitoring and sampling requirements on the plant’s management.
From March 1987 through March 1988, the excess waste activated sludge (“WAS”) generated by the plant was hauled away to another treatment plant, the Sand Island Facility. In March 1988, certain improvements were made to the East Honolulu plant and the hauling was discontinued. Within a few weeks, however, the plant began experiencing a buildup of excess WAS. Instead of continuing the practice of hauling away WAS, defendants instead instructed two Plant employees to dispose of 436,000 pounds of WAS directly into the ocean on 40 separate occasions. Most of the WAS discharges occurred during the night, and none was reported to the DOH or EPA.
Following an FBI investigation, the defendants were charged with several violations of the Clean Water Act (“CWA”). To be convicted, the state had to prove that the defendants “knowingly” violated the CEW. The court construed “knowingly” as requiring only that the defendants were aware that they were discharging the pollutants in question, not that they new they were violating the terms of the statute or permit. The defendants argued that they believed their conduct was authorized by the permit.
The jury found them guilty.
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.
Topic Resources
Topic Refresher Course
Elements of a Crime: Mens Rea