Confirm favorite deletion?
Criminal Law Keyed to Osler
United States v. Uder
Citation:98 F. 3d 1039 (8th Cir. 1996)
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:
Mike Willis worked at Lloyd Dale Hightower’s auto shop, doing legitimate auto work, when he suspected it was being used as a chop shop to sell stolen parts and con stolen vehicles. He reported his suspicions to the FBI. R0bert Moon testified that he was in the business at the time of stealing cars for chop shop, including Hightower’s. Hightower was incarcerated, but directed Moon to steal a Suburban and change the bodies before selling it for $2,000. Moon had Charles Berry Roberson steal a 1994 Suburban and had the defendant and Mat Lowrance do the body work for $600 each. Defendant and Lowrance did most of the worked on January 1st and 2nd of 1994. When they went to the auto shop on January 3rd, they were waived off because law enforcement was present. This story was corroborated by Roberson, Lowrance, Rodden, and Hightower’s wife. Defendant was convicted and appealed that there was insufficient evidence for his conviction of operating a chop shop.
- 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.