Case Analysis Fact Patterns, law homework help

CRM 123 – Case
Analysis 5 Fact Patterns

an analysis for each scenario below. See the Case Analysis Instructions for further information about completing
the assignment.

  1. Jonas
    is 18 and recently finished high school. He lives at home with his mom and dad.
    While collecting dirty laundry in his room one day, Jonas’ mother discovered
    some of Jonas’ clothing with dried blood on them. She also found a bloody survival
    knife and muddy boots under his bed, as well as a bracelet that said “Lynn.” A
    few days earlier, police had discovered the missing body of Jonas’ high school
    sweetheart, Lynn, in the woods. Lynn had recently broken up with him. The
    medical examiner had determined that Lynn had died from repeated stabbing. When
    Jonas had been questioned by the police at the station, he claimed he knew
    nothing of the incident, and the police have no evidence tying Jonas to the
    disappearance or murder. Analyze these facts using ethical concepts or concerns
    from Module 8. (You are not evaluating elements of murder, or due process
    issues for example.)

  2. District
    Attorney Schultz has brought charges against three players of the University football
    team. They have been charged with raping a stripper at a party attended by team
    members. The case has received much publicity and the media have discovered
    that the three players have a history of violence towards women. (Last year,
    two other women claimed they had been raped, but the cell phone video showing
    the forced sex had been excluded based on an illegal police search, and the
    players were found “not guilty.”) Shultz believes these players are guilty,
    and has given approximately 60 media interviews on the case. Schultz has also
    been campaigning for reelection, and a conviction here would go a long way. Unfortunately
    for Schultz, the DNA tests he ran do not match any of the three players to the
    victim’s assault. When he questioned her about this, the victim made
    contradictory statements, and she had no other evidence to corroborate the
    events. In fact, while her statements confirm that they raped her, she admitted
    to having consensual sex with two other men at the party, which weakens the
    case. Schultz decides to not tell anyone about the DNA results unless asked,
    and instructs the victim/witness to deny the other sexual encounters at trial.
    Analyze these facts using ethical concepts or concerns from Module 8. (You are
    not evaluating elements of rape or due process issues for example.) Assuming
    that Schultz had a strong belief that the defendants were guilty, include in your
    analysis whether this affects the moral and legal permissibility of his conduct.

  3. Michelle
    worked two jobs as a security guard in Phoenix, Arizona. She was walking
    outside the building where she works at 6:30 AM, Monday, when two bundles of
    money fell out of an armored truck en route to a bank. Inside the bundles was
    approximately $500,000. Michelle had an inheritance that would post to her bank
    account on Wednesday. She decides to take the day off and head to Las Vegas to
    play poker. Unfortunately, Michelle lost all of the money she gambled, but
    luckily, as expected, on Wednesday, her inheritance was paid. Michelle turned
    all of the $500,000 in to the FBI on Thursday morning, three days after finding
    it. Analyze these facts using ethical concepts or concerns from Module 8. (You
    are not evaluating elements of theft, conversion, or torts.) Include in your
    analysis whether Michelle was morally obligated to return the money. Should
    Michelle be penalized for using the money or for waiting three days to return the

Grading criteria


The goals of this assignment are to provide a valuable skill and to assess your ability to comprehend and apply case law. Reading, briefing, and applying what you are reading in your textbook and learning in the modules are effective ways to become literate in the process of the U.S. legal system.

Conducting an Analysis

Before making and defending a decision, you must be familiar with the relevant law. For our purposes, your textbook and course material provide all the legal concepts needed to apply the law to a factual situation. Once you are familiar with the general content of the chapter, you should be able to recognize the issue involved in a case and find the legal concepts that will help you decide the case. For your reference, a sample analysis is provided at the end of this document.

First, you will read the assigned fact patterns (provided via a link in the module). Then, you will complete an analysis for all fact patterns presented. Each analysis should contain the following:

1. The main issue. Identify and write (in your own words, at least 50% original) the central issue to be decided. As much as possible, set the issue in legal terms and concepts.

2. Relevant legal concepts quoted from textbook court opinions. Search the assigned chapter for legal concepts that will help you decide and justify your decision. Once you find the quotations you wish to use, copy them into the appropriate places in your analysis.

3. Relevant case law quoted from the textbook.

4. Rationale. Write (in your own words, at least 50% original) a complete explanation about how you used the legal concepts you cited to make a decision about how the case should be resolved.

5. Ruling. Describe (in your own words, at least 50% original) what should happen to the parties involved as a result of your decision.

Submit your Case Analysis to the Dropbox no later than Sunday 11:59 PM EST/EDT of the assigned module. (The Dropbox baskets for these assignments are linked to Turnitin.)

Grading Rubric


Exceptional corresponds to an A (90-100). Performance is outstanding; significantly above the usual expectations.

Proficient corresponds to a grade of B- to B+ (80-89%). Skills are at the level of expectation.

Basic corresponds to a C- to C+ (70-79%). Skills are acceptable but improvements are needed to meet expectations well.

Novice corresponds to a D to D+ (60-69%). Performance is weak; the skills are not sufficiently demonstrated at this time.

0 This criterion is missing or not in evidence. Criteria







Correctly framing the specific legal question to be decided





Looking for this or a Similar Assignment? Click below to Place your Order