Logourl black
From our private database of 13,800+ case briefs...

United States v. Lightly

United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
677 F.2d 1027 (1982)


Facts

Randy Lightly (defendant) and Clifton McDuffie, inmates at Lorton Reformatory, were investigated regarding their involvement in the stabbing of Terrance McKinley, a fellow inmate. The grand jury indicted Lightly but not McDuffie because a court appointed psychiatrist found McDuffie to be criminally insane and incompetent to stand trial. At Lightly’s trial, McKinley, two other inmates and McKinley’s doctor testified that Lightly and McDuffie cornered McKinley in his cell and repeatedly stabbed him. The testimony indicated that the bad cut on Lightly’s hand was the result of this altercation. Lightly, whose testimony was corroborated by the testimony of three other inmates, said that he saw McDuffie stabbing McKinley and when he stepped in to stop McDuffie, McDuffie slashed Lightly’s hand. Lightly sought to have McDuffie testify. McDuffie, who was confined to a mental hospital, would have testified that he was the only person attacking McKinley. McDuffie’s treating physician testified that McDuffie’s memory was sufficient, that he understood the oath and was able to testify about what he saw. After declining to hear McDuffie’s proffered testimony in camera, the court ruled that McDuffie was not competent to testify because he had been found criminally insane and incompetent to stand trial and suffered from hallucinations. Lightly was convicted of assault with intent to commit murder and appealed his conviction claiming that the trial court erred in disqualifying McDuffie as a witness under Federal Rule of Evidence (FRE) 601.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Holding and Reasoning (Ervin, 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, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

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 168,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,800 briefs, keyed to 187 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.