Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Manson v. Brathwaite

United States Supreme Court
432 U.S. 98 (1977)


Facts

Glover, an undercover narcotics officer, went to an apartment to buy drugs. He knocked on the door of an apartment and a man inside opened it 12 to 18 inches. Glover told the man what he wanted and handed over some money. The man inside closed the door and, when he returned, he handed Glover two bags of drugs. While the door was opened, Glover stood about two feet away from the man inside. The transaction took place during daylight hours so the sun was coming in through windows on the stairwell and windows from inside the apartment. The entire transaction took about five to seven minutes. When Glover left the building, he drove to police headquarters where he gave other officers a detailed description of the man who had sold him the drugs. One of the officers recognized the description as that of Brathwaite (defendant). The officer then found a photo of Brathwaite and put it in Glover’s office for him to look at. Two days later, and when he was alone, Glover looked at the photo and identified the man as the person who had sold him the drugs. Brathwaite was charged with possession and sale of heroin. The photo from which Glover identified Brathwaite was introduced into evidence. Glover testified he had no doubt that the man in the photo was the one who sold him the drugs. Glover also made an in-court identification. The jury found Brathwaite guilty. The court of appeals applied a per se rule, holding that suggestive, pre-trial witness identifications must be excluded from evidence.

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 (Blackmun, J.)

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.

Concurrence (Stevens, J.)

The concurrence section is for members only and includes a summary of the concurring judge or justice’s opinion.

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

Dissent (Marshall, 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…

  1. 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 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. 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. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 175,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 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.