Hate ads? Verify for LSD+ → Learn More

Case Citation
Legal Case Name

Proctor v. State Case Brief

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma1918Docket #3916047
176 P. 771 15 Okla. Crim. 338 1918 OK CR 190 1918 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 80 Criminal Law Constitutional Law

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

General Brief
3 min read

tl;dr: The court struck down a statute that criminalized “keeping a place” with the intent to sell liquor. It held that a crime requires an unlawful act (actus reus), and a lawful act combined with a mere unexecuted criminal intent (mens rea) is not punishable.

Legal Significance: This case establishes that a criminal offense requires the concurrence of a criminal intent (mensrea) and a criminal act (actus reus). A statute that attempts to punish a person for a lawful act coupled with a mere unexecuted, unlawful intent is unconstitutional and void.

Proctor v. State 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

The plaintiff in error, Proctor, was convicted under an Oklahoma statute making it a felony to “keep a place with the intention of, or for the purpose of manufacturing, selling, bartering, giving away, or otherwise furnishing” intoxicating liquors. The information filed against Proctor charged him with keeping a two-story brick building with the unlawful intent to sell such liquors. Proctor demurred, arguing the statute was unconstitutional because it punished a mere unexecuted intention connected to a lawful act. The information did not allege that Proctor possessed any liquor, that he had taken any steps to prepare for a sale, or that any sale had actually occurred. The charge rested entirely on the combination of the lawful act of “keeping a place” and the alleged unlawful intent. The State conceded that an unexecuted intent alone is not punishable but argued that the act of keeping the place, when coupled with the present intent to sell liquor there, constituted a sufficient overt act to be criminalized.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Does a statute that criminalizes the lawful act of “keeping a place” when combined with only an unexecuted intent to commit an unlawful act in the future, without requiring any overt unlawful act, define a constitutionally valid crime?

No, the statute is unconstitutional and void. The court held 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 velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non pr

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

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 a statute that criminalizes the lawful act of “keeping a place” when combined with only an unexecuted intent to commit an unlawful act in the future, without requiring any overt unlawful act, define a constitutionally valid crime?

Conclusion

This case serves as a foundational precedent affirming the actus reus requirement 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 exercitat

Legal Rule

To constitute a crime, there must be a combination of a vicious 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. Dui

Legal Analysis

The court's analysis centered on the foundational criminal law principle that a 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 s

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • A statute criminalizing the “keeping of a place” with the mere
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 r

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

Hate ads? Verify for LSD+ → Learn More