CRJ 550 Legal Issues in Criminal Justice Administration Case Brief ExampleThis is an example of a well-written case brief. Note the compliance with the required format and how the student gets right to the important points in plain language. If legal terms are encounter which are not understood, chances are that other students will not understand them, so it is best not to use them unless defined within the brief. Assignment sub-heading: Sixth Amendment Right to Counsel TITLE AND CITATION: Nix v. Williams, 467 U.S. 431, 104 S.Ct. 2501 (1984) TYPE OF ACTION: Review by the U.S. Supreme Court of a lower court ruling that evidence should be suppressed as a result of a violation of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. The state (Nix) sought to overturn the motion to suppress that was upheld by the U.S. District Court of Appeals. FACTS OF THE CASE: On December 24, 1968, ten year old Pamela Powers was kidnapped from an Iowa YMCA and her body was later found in a ditch, which was within an extensive area that was being searched by volunteers and law enforcement. The defendant was observed “carrying a large bundle wrapped in a blanket…two legs in it and they were skinny and white.” Williams’ car, which contained clothing items belonging to the victim, was found the next day approximately 160 miles from the incident. Based on this information, an extensive search was started that extended from Des Moines to Davenport, Iowa. Law enforcement obtained a warrant for Williams’ arrest, and he subsequently turned himself into the authorities in Davenport. Williams was arraigned and had obtained and spoken with an attorney. Des Moines police detectives agreed to transport Williams and not interview him during the drive between Davenport and Des Moines. During the drive, one of the detectives on the case began to speak to Williams regarding the need to find the child’s body before it snowed so that her parents could give her a proper, “Christian” burial. The detective did not ask Williams any specific questions during this conversation. At that point, Williams provided statements to the detectives that led them to the child’s body. Williams was then tried in state court and was found guilty of first degree murder. Williams filed a motion to suppress the evidence of the body and all related evidence concerning the body’s location based on illegally obtained testimony. When the conviction was affirmed by the Iowa state Supreme Court, Williams sought relief in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa. The U.S. District Court, U.S. Court of Appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court agreed with Williams and determined that he was denied the right to counsel and his statements, which led to the child’s body, could not be introduced into evidence. Williams was tried in state court a second time, without the use by the prosecution of the statements he had given to detectives. Prosecutors introduced evidence of the child’s body under the premise.

1. CRJ 550
Legal Issues in Criminal Justice Administration
Case Brief ExampleThis is an example of a well-written case
brief. Note the compliance with the required format and how the
student gets right to the important points in plain language. If
legal terms are encounter which are not understood, chances are
that other students will not understand them, so it is best not to
use them unless defined within the brief.
Assignment sub-heading: Sixth Amendment Right to Counsel
TITLE AND CITATION: Nix v. Williams, 467 U.S. 431, 104
S.Ct. 2501 (1984)
TYPE OF ACTION: Review by the U.S. Supreme Court of a
lower court ruling that evidence should be suppressed as a
result of a violation of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel.
The state (Nix) sought to overturn the motion to suppress that
was upheld by the U.S. District Court of Appeals.
FACTS OF THE CASE:
On December 24, 1968, ten year old Pamela Powers was
kidnapped from an Iowa YMCA and her body was later found in
a ditch, which was within an extensive area that was being
searched by volunteers and law enforcement. The defendant was
observed “carrying a large bundle wrapped in a blanket…two
legs in it and they were skinny and white.” Williams’ car, which
contained clothing items belonging to the victim, was found the
next day approximately 160 miles from the incident. Based on
this information, an extensive search was started that extended
from Des Moines to Davenport, Iowa.
Law enforcement obtained a warrant for Williams’ arrest, and
he subsequently turned himself into the authorities in

2. Davenport. Williams was arraigned and had obtained and
spoken with an attorney. Des Moines police detectives agreed to
transport Williams and not interview him during the drive
between Davenport and Des Moines. During the drive, one of
the detectives on the case began to speak to Williams regarding
the need to find the child’s body before it snowed so that her
parents could give her a proper, “Christian” burial. The
detective did not ask Williams any specific questions during
this conversation. At that point, Williams provided statements
to the detectives that led them to the child’s body.
Williams was then tried in state court and was found guilty of
first degree murder. Williams filed a motion to suppress the
evidence of the body and all related evidence concerning the
body’s location based on illegally obtained testimony. When the
conviction was affirmed by the Iowa state Supreme Court,
Williams sought relief in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Iowa. The U.S. District Court, U.S. Court
of Appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court agreed with Williams
and determined that he was denied the right to counsel and his
statements, which led to the child’s body, could not be
introduced into evidence.
Williams was tried in state court a second time, without the use
by the prosecution of the statements he had given to detectives.
Prosecutors introduced evidence of the child’s body under the
premise of “inevitable discovery”, as the child’s body was in an
area that was within the designated search area. Williams was
convicted a second time and the conviction was upheld by the
Iowa Supreme Court again. Appeals by the parties brought the
case back to the U.S. Supreme Court a second time.
CONTENTIONS OF THE PARTIES:
Nix: The state (Nix) contends that the evidence of the child’s
body and all related evidence concerning the body as to its
location should be admissible in spite of the denial of right to

3. counsel because the body would have been discovered in any
event due to the wide-ranging search in the area which was not
the result of anything that Williams said to the detectives. In the
second trial, the defendant’s statements were not introduced,
but the body evidence should still be admissible because it
would have been discovered and in the same condition anyway
even if there was no violation of the Sixth Amendment. The
child’s body was found well within the extensive search area
and would have been located by one or more of the over two
hundred searchers nearly the same time that the defendant took
the detectives to the child’s body. This argument is called the
“inevitable discovery rule.”
Williams: Williams contends that were it not for the illegally
obtained statements from Williams by law enforcement, the
evidence would not have been discovered or used against the
defendant. The evidence obtained is considered the “fruit of the
poisonous tree,” and therefore should not be admitted at trial.
ISSUE: Once a violation of the Sixth Amendment right to
counsel has occurred, can evidence obtained from the illegally-
obtained statements be admitted at trial based on the fact that
the evidence would have been discovered anyway?
DECISION: Yes, because the prosecution was able to prove that
the same physical evidence would have been discovered even if
the constitutional rights violation did not occur.
REASONING: The court applied the reasoning of the
independent source doctrine to that of inevitable discovery.
“The independent source doctrine teaches us that the interest of
society in deterring unlawful police conduct and the public
interest in having juries receive all probative evidence of a
crime are properly balanced by putting the police in the same,
not a worse, position that they would have been in if no police
error or misconduct had occurred” (quoting from Nix v.

4. Williams, 104 S.Ct. 2501, 2509 (1984)).
RULE OF LAW: Evidence that may have been obtained in
violation of a constitutional protection may still be admissible
if it can be proven by a preponderance of the evidence that it
was inevitable that the evidence would have been discovered
even if the violation had not occurred. This is known as the
“inevitable discovery” rule.
Scenario:
Apex Printing, Inc.
Apex Printing, Inc. is a private, domestic United States printer
of periodicals, newspaper inserts, and advertising materials that
accompany distributions of Sunday and weekday circulations of
large metropolitan newspapers. The company, headed by CEO
John Matthews, generates $450 million in revenues from three
product lines (periodicals, inserts, and advertising) and has
long-term contracts with several large U.S. retailers to produce
weekly sales flyer inserts as well as metropolitan newspapers to
produce Sunday magazine inserts and coupons. Its printing
presses are characterized by offset print technology and capable
of high-capacity output; in addition, the company recently
migrated to water-soluble inks, which reduce manufacturing
emissions considerably.
The company’s executive team, employees, and above all, its
Vice President (VP) of Production, Luke Stewart, are committed
to environmentally sustainable manufacturing practices.
Presently, the only substrate Apex uses is paper, specifically
newsprint of various weights. Trim and waste are recycled in
accordance with the company’s sustainability commitment.
Manufacturing divisions are geographically aligned with
customers’ locations to minimize logistics cost and response
time to customer requirements; however, a centralized corporate
entity administers functions such as human resources,
information technology, and financial reporting. The VP of
Sales and Administration, James Simeon, oversees

5. administration and quality compliance among the various
divisions. There are presently five manufacturing divisions:
Northwest, Southwest, Northeast, Southeast, and Midwest.
Currently, Apex is only marginally profitable, and as such, the
Chief Financial Officer (CFO), Mary Francis, has indicated that
external financing will be required to support a company
expansion into a new segment of the printing sector: food
packaging. This endeavor will require new investments in
equipment as well as substrate inventory; promotional costs will
also increase. In addition, Timothy Russell, the new Audit
Committee Chair, has pointed out that the company’s
compliance with the requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
(SOX) will cause administrative costs to increase, as well. But
following the requirements is paramount to successfully file a
registration statement and issue equity to shareholders in an
initial public offering (IPO).
As the newly hired VP of finance, you report to the CFO. In this
capacity, your responsibilities include preparation of financial
statements, comparative analysis and benchmarking to sector
performance, and assessment of new business investment
opportunities to grow Apex’s expansion endeavors in a
challenging market.
NPV - IRRFIN 615NPV and IRR calculationsCost of
Capital1.00%Time/yr012345Cash flow Input hereDiscounted
CF000000NPV0=cf1/((1+n)^1)=cf2/((1+n)^2)=cf3/((1+n)^3)=cf
4/((1+n)^4)=cf5/((1+n)^5)PV
factor0.99009900990.98029604940.97059014790.96098034450.
9514656876IRR0.00%
Sheet3

6. Apex Printing
Balance Sheets
As of December 31, 2013 and 2012
000$ 000$
Assets 2013 2012
Cash 6,000 5,700
Accounts Receivable 2,350 2,300
Inventory 12,100 6,500
Total Current Assets 20,450 14,500
Land 25,000 20,000
Building & Equipment 300,000 300,000
Less: Accumulated Depreciation - Building & Equipment
(187,850) (160,000)
Total Long Term Assets 137,150 160,000
Total Assets 157,600 174,500
Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity
Accounts Payable 4,600 3,500
Salaries Payable 0 2,100
Interest Payable 1,500 0
Short Term Notes Payable 12,000 0
Taxes Payable 0 5,600
Total Current Liabilities 18,100 11,200

7. Mortgate Payable 54,950 100,000
Total Long Term Liabilities 54,950 100,000
Common Stock 60,000 60,000
Retained Earnings 24,550 3,300
Total Stockholders' Equity 84,550 63,300
Total Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity 157,600 174,500
Apex Printing
Income Statements
For the Periods Ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 000$ 000$
2013 2012
Revenue: 450,000 475,000
Less: Cost of Goods Sold (324,300) (374,500)
Less: Depreciation Expense (27,850) (26,000)
Gross Margin 97,850 74,500
Selling, General & Administrative Expenses (29,100) (32,000)
Income Before Interest & Taxes 68,750 42,500

8. Interest Expense (7,500) (6,000)
Income Before Taxes 61,250 36,500
Income Taxes (35,000) (30,000)
Net Income 26,250 6,500
Apex Printing
Statement of Cash Flows
For the Period Ended December 31, 2013
000$
Cash Flows from Operating Activities:
Net Income 26,250
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by
operating activities
Depreciation Expense 27,850
Increase in accounts receivable (50)
Increase in inventory (5,600)
Decrease in salaries payable (2,100)
Increase in interest payable 1,500
Decrease in taxes payable (5,600)

9. Increase in Short Term notes Payable 12,000
Increase in accounts payable 1,100
Net Cash Flow from Operating Activities
55,350
Cash Flows from Investing Activities:
Cash paid to purchase land (5,000)
Net Cash Flow from Investing Activities
(5,000)
Cash Flows From Financing Activities:
Cash paid for mortgage (45,050)
Cash paid for dividends (5,000)
Net Cash Flow from Financing Activities
(50,050)
Net Increase in Cash
300
Plus: Cash Balance at December 31, 2012
5,700
Cash Balance at December 31, 2013

10. 6,000