SmartBrief
Confirm favorite deletion?
Criminal Law Keyed to Osler
United States v. Rash
Citation:
840 F.3d 462 (7th Cir. 2016)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:
In 2007 the police caught the defendant, who was a convicted felon, with a gun. Defendant was arrested and during the interview he said that the gun belonged to his girlfriend and said that she left the gun at his house and was returning it to her because he knew that he was not allowed to have a gun. Defendant was still convicted by a jury and at sentencing, the judge applied a two-level enhancement for perjury, due to the defendant’s testimony that he was with his girlfriend when she purchased the gun but was uninterested and looking at other things at the store directly conflicted with video surveillance of the store showing that to be false. However, that enhancement did not matter because there was a mandatory minimum of 15 years for the crime the defendant was convicted of.
At defendant’s re-sentencing, in light of the removed mandatory minimum statute, each side argued regarding the enhanced sentence due to perjury. Defendant argued that his statement regarding his role in the gun store was not material because he admitted at trial that he had possession of the gun. The government argued that it was material because it minimized his connection to the gun in an effort to obtain jury nullification regardless of his admission to possession. The district court agreed with the government and applied the enhanced sentence.
- 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.