Connection lost
Server error
BREED v. JONES Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A juvenile was found to have committed robbery in a juvenile court adjudicatory hearing. The court then transferred him to adult court for criminal prosecution. The Supreme Court held this violated the Double Jeopardy Clause because jeopardy attaches at the initial juvenile hearing.
Legal Significance: This case established that the Fifth Amendment’s Double Jeopardy Clause applies to juvenile adjudicatory proceedings. A state cannot prosecute a juvenile as an adult for an offense after a juvenile court has already adjudicated the youth’s delinquency based on that same offense.
BREED v. JONES Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
A petition was filed in California Juvenile Court alleging that the respondent, a 17-year-old, had committed acts that would constitute robbery. The juvenile court held an adjudicatory hearing, taking testimony from witnesses and the respondent. The court found the allegations to be true and sustained the petition, thus determining that the respondent had violated the criminal statute. At a subsequent dispositional hearing, the juvenile court found the respondent was not amenable to treatment as a juvenile and ordered him to be prosecuted as an adult. An information was then filed in Superior Court (adult criminal court) charging the respondent with the same robbery. The respondent entered a plea of “once in jeopardy,” but he was tried and found guilty. After exhausting state remedies, the respondent filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in federal court, arguing that his trial in adult court violated the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed, and the Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment prohibit the criminal prosecution of a juvenile in adult court for the same offense that was the subject of a prior adjudicatory hearing in juvenile court?
Yes. The prosecution of the respondent in adult court after an adjudicatory Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Does the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment prohibit the criminal prosecution of a juvenile in adult court for the same offense that was the subject of a prior adjudicatory hearing in juvenile court?
Conclusion
Breed v. Jones established a critical procedural safeguard by mandating that the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate veli
Legal Rule
Jeopardy attaches in a juvenile adjudicatory hearing once the trier of fact Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor
Legal Analysis
The Supreme Court began its analysis by rejecting the "civil label-of-convenience" historically Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostr
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- The prosecution of a juvenile in adult court after an adjudicatory