SmartBrief
0
Confirm favorite deletion?
Criminal Law keyed to Dripps
United States v. Armstrong
Citation:
517 U.S. 456, 116 S. Ct. 1480, 134 L.Ed.2d 687.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:
For three months in early 1992, agents from the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, as well as the Narcotics Division of the Inglewood, California Police Department, infiltrated a suspected crack distribution ring through use of confidential informants. On seven separate occasions, the informants bought a total of 124.3 grams of crack from respondents and witnessed the respondents carrying firearms during the sales. When agents searched the hotel room where the sales were transacted, they found more crack and a loaded gun. The agents also arrested the respondents at that time. In April 1992, the respondents were indicted in United States Federal District Court in California for conspiring to possess with intent to distribute more than 50 grams of crack cocaine and conspiring to distribute the drugs.
In response to the indictment, the respondents filed a motion for discovery or dismissal which included an affidavit “study” from a paralegal specialist with the Federal Public Defender showing that in similar cases in 1991 all defendants were black. After the motion was granted, and upon the Government’s motion for reconsideration, the respondents also submitted an affidavit from one of their attorneys that an intake coordinator at a drug treatment center advised her there were “an equal number of caucasian users and dealers to minority users and dealers.” As well as another affidavit from a criminal defense attorney that stated, in his experience, many non-black individuals were prosecuted in state court for crack offenses.
- 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.
10m 19s
