Confirm favorite deletion?
Evidence Keyed to Leonard
United States v. Abel
Citation:469 U.S. 45 (1984)
Abel was charged with bank robbery. An alleged accomplice, Ehle, testified for the prosecution. Abel called Mills to impeach Ehle by testifying that Ehle said he would falsely implicate Abel to gain favor with the prosecutors. Ehle testified that he, Abel, and Mills were all members of the Aryan Brotherhood, a secret prison gang that required its members to lie, cheat, and steal to protect each other. Ehle testified that Mills had lied about Ehle to protect Abel. Abel was convicted. Respondent contends that even if the evidence of membership in the prison gang were relevant to show bias, the district court erred in permitting a full description of the gang.
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.