This website requires JavaScript. Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings, or use a different web browser like Google Chrome or Safari.

Options

From our private database of 35,400+ case briefs...

California v. Prysock

United States Supreme Court

453 U.S. 355 (1981)

Facts

Prysock (defendant) and a co-defendant were suspects in the murder of Donna Iris Erickson. At the police station, Prysock was given the warnings required by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966) and refused to speak. After Prysock’s parents arrived, Prysock agreed to be interrogated. The officer again gave Prysock all of the Miranda warnings, but did not follow the same formulation set forth in Miranda. In particular, the warning that Prysock had a right to have an attorney appointed for free came several warnings after the warning that Prysock had a right to consult with an attorney and have that attorney present during questioning. The trial court denied Prysock’s motion to suppress the interrogation. Prysock was tried by jury and convicted of first-degree murder. The appellate court reversed the conviction on the grounds that the Miranda warnings were not sufficient and ordered a new trial. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision. To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question. To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Per Curiam)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
The procedural disposition (e.g., reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Dissent (Stevens, J.)

The dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the dissenting judge or justice’s opinion. To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 616,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.
Unlock this case brief Read our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.
Learn about our approach Read more about Quimbee

Here's why 616,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 35,400 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Here's why 616,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
35,400 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
Uniform format for every case brief
Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
Top-notch customer support