SmartBrief
0
Confirm favorite deletion?
Criminal Law Keyed to Kennedy
United States v. Fitz
Citation:
317 F.3d 878 (2003)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:
The defendant, Vega, and Preciado traveled from Minneapolis to Grand Forks in a Honda Civic and a Nissan Pathfinder, in which methamphetamine was hidden. The defendant was observed in the presence of Preciado and Vega in Grand Forks at various locations between 6:00 p.m. and 9:30 p.m. The defendant was also present during a recorded conversation between a confidential informant and Preciado in the Burger King parking lot in Grand Forks, in which Preciado said he wanted everything and wanted to return to the motel to discuss the matter. Thereafter, Preciado and the defendant left the parking lot in a Honda Civic when they were stopped by the Grand Forks Narcotics Task Force officers and arrested.
The confidential informant never talked to the defendant. Moreover, the conversation that occurred in the defendant’s presence between the confidential informant and Preciado was conducted in English, and there is no evidence in the record that shows that he spoke or understands English. Further, there is no evidence in the record to indicate that the defendant knew there were drugs in a secret compartment in the Pathfinder’s gas tank. The defendant had no prior criminal record or any record of dealing in drugs.
He was convicted of conspiracy to distribute the drugs.
- 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
