Brad was at a bar one evening to have a few drinks. After his second drink, he began to feel more intoxicated than he would have thought. He suspected the man standing next to him of spiking his drink. The two men began to fight, and Brad threw a punch. The fight escalated and the man pulled out a gun.

Brad then ran out of the bar and the man chased after him. Brad ran to the next block and to a house. He yelled and pounded at the door, and the door opened under his force. He went in. No one was home, but Brad saw a rifle hanging on the wall. He took the rifle and ran outside to confront the man chasing him. The man ran away upon seeing Brad with the rifle, just as the police pulled up and shined a spotlight on the scene. The man got away and Brad was arrested and taken in to a detox facility. Tests later revealed that Brad's drink contained Rohyponl.

Brad was charged with assault, burglary and theft. He met with your firm's attorney where you sat in on the meeting. The attorney has asked you to write a brief addressing the following:

1. What are elements of each of the crimes Brad has been charged with under the laws of the state of MN (or your state, if you choose). Do an analysis to determine if each of the elements of the crimes are satisfied by the facts we have. (IRAC)
2. What facts would we need to confirm or verify in order to challenge any of these convictions? What questions need to be answered? In other words, what would you need to know?
3. Which defenses apply? How? Please provide an analysis of these defenses that include the facts of the scenario, and apply them to the elements of the crimes.
4. Are any of these defenses Affirmative Defenses? Which ones?
5. How does each affirmative defense (if there are any) affect the prosecution's burden of proof in proving Brad's guilt?

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

ANSWER Analysis of Brads Charges under Minnesota Law 1 Assault Elements Intentionally causing bodily harm to another person Analysis Brad threw a punc... View the full answer