Confirm favorite deletion?
Criminal Law Keyed to Osler
United States v. Eiland
Citation:738 F. 3d 338 (D.C. Cir. 2013)
The FBI began investigating a drug trafficking ring in Washing D.C. Their investigation lead to evidence that Eiland and Miller were operating a wide ranging-drug ring. Officers got a warrant to wiretap Miller’s cell phones and the FBI obtained substantial evidence from the wire taps. This lead to the defendant’s indictment for conspiring to distribute heroin, cocaine, cocaine base, and PCP, along with Continuing Criminal Enterprise (CCE), and racketeering offenses. Defendants were convicted on all charges except distributing PCP.
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.