Warning
Info
- - tl;dr
- - ICRA
- - Facts & Holding
- - DeepDive
0 0
Supreme Court of Missouri - 16 S.W. 514, 105 Mo. 76
DeepDiveHighlight a legal term to see the definition
The defendant is appealing a five-year prison sentence for burglary and theft. The defendant was caught breaking into a general store with another person and stealing a 45-pound piece of bacon. Shots were fired, and the defendant denied being at the store but was captured and arrested. The court's instructions to the jury are being appealed, specifically the instruction that the defendant could be found guilty of burglary if the jury believed beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was present and assisted in the breaking and entering of the store with the intent to steal, even if another person did not have the same intent. The trial court erred in instructing the jury that the defendant could be found guilty of burglary if he assisted Hill in entering the building with a felonious intent, even if Hill himself had no such intent. The defendant cannot be held responsible for the act of the detective who entered the building to entrap him, as there was a lack of community of motive. The defendant cannot be held responsible for the crime of burglary as he did not commit every overt act that went to make up the crime. To hold the defendant responsible for the acts of another person, they must have had a common motive and design. The Jansen case supports this doctrine, which is just and humane. The Speiden case and other legal authorities also support this rule.
LSD+ Case Briefs
Features
- DeepDive for detailed case analysis
- Over 50,000 existing case briefs
- Instant briefs for another 6,000,000 cases
- Highlight dictionary for legal term definitions
- Social learning with chat and high points
Over 50,000 Cases Briefed
LSD+ gives you access to over 50,000 case briefs, more than anyone else. Be the first to email us the website of a case brief product that offers you more case briefs and we'll give you a free year of LSD+.
14-Day Free Trial
Unlimited access. Read as much content as you want during your trial with no device limitations. Cancel any time during your trial and keep access for the full 14 days.
Integrated Legal Dictionary
Lawyers and judges love to use big words. And Latin, for some reason.
Highlight a legal term in LSD Briefs and get an instant, plain English definition. Try highlighting contract or specific performance. No need to search or read through a list of definitions, simply highlight the words you don’t know and our LSDefine integration will instantly give you a definition to any of over 30,000 legal terms.
DeepDive
DeepDive allows you to explore legal cases like never before. DeepDive offers multiple levels of case summaries, which empowers you to quickly and easily find the information you need to stay on top of readings. Easily navigate through summary levels and click on any text to get more detail, all the way down to the original legal case text.
Brief anything. Instantly.
Our proprietary state-of-the-art system can instantly brief over 6,000,000 US cases. That means we can probably brief that case that your professor assigned last night when she sent you a poorly scanned pdf and told you to read every third paragraph. Or maybe she uploaded it to Canvas and didn’t really tell you to read it, but you know you probably should. Tenure does wild things to good people.
Social Learning with Chat and High Points
Study groups are a great way to learn and explore a case. LSD has chat rooms for each case to let you ask questions across the community and hear what other students struggled with and how they put it all together. Learn the key points of every case from other LSD+ users and share your knowledge with LSD High Points.
Real-Time Brief Feedback
Don’t settle for mistakes in briefs that have been there for 10 years and never fixed. Find an issue or something missing from a brief? Down vote and we will make improvements. All of our case brief editors graduated from from T14 law schools.