Kibbe v. Henderson
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
534 F.2d 493 (1976)
- Written by Craig Conway, LLM
Facts
Barry Kibbe and Roy Krall (defendants) gave an intoxicated George Stafford a ride from a bar with the intent of robbing him. As Krall drove, Kibbe demanded Stafford’s money and then forced him to lower his pants and remove his boots to prove he did not have any more. Defendants then abandoned the partially-undressed Stafford on the side of a snow-blown, unlit, rural two-lane highway. Shortly thereafter, a vehicle driven by Michael Blake struck Stafford who was sitting in the middle of the road. Stafford later died. Defendants were charged with second-degree robbery, grand larceny, and second-degree murder. The trial judge failed to instruct the jury on the issues of causation and intervening or supervening causes. Defense counsel failed to object to the court’s omission. Defendants were found guilty. Defendants appealed. The appellate court affirmed the convictions on the basis that defendants’ actions, as well as the actions of Blake, caused Stafford’s death. Kibbe filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in federal district court against Robert Henderson, superintendent of the correctional facility where Kibbe was imprisoned. The district court denied Kibbe’s petition. Kibbe appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Lumbard, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 796,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 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.