Case Citation
Legal Case Name

STATE v. GUTHRIE Case Brief

Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia1995
461 S.E.2d 163 194 W.Va. 657 Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Evidence

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
4 min read

tl;dr: A man convicted of first-degree murder for stabbing a teasing coworker appealed. The court reversed, holding that jury instructions improperly defined “premeditation” by equating it with an instantaneous intent to kill, thereby erasing the legal distinction between first and second-degree murder.

Legal Significance: This case is significant for rejecting the concept of “instantaneous premeditation.” It clarifies that first-degree murder requires a period of reflection and conscious consideration—not just a momentary intent to kill—thereby re-establishing a meaningful distinction between first and second-degree murder.

STATE v. GUTHRIE 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 defendant, Dale Guthrie, worked as a dishwasher with the victim, Steven Farley. The defendant suffered from several psychiatric disorders, including chronic depression and an obsessive fixation on his nose (body dysmorphic disorder). One evening at work, Farley and other coworkers were joking around. Farley playfully snapped a dishtowel at Guthrie several times, with one snap hitting him on the nose. Enraged, Guthrie removed his work gloves, took a knife from his pocket, and fatally stabbed Farley in the neck. When the victim cried out that he was just kidding, Guthrie responded, “Well, man, you should have never hit me in my face.” At trial, Guthrie testified that he suffered a panic attack and could not recall the stabbing. A defense psychiatrist testified that Guthrie was legally sane but that his disorders may have affected his perception. The jury was instructed that to find premeditation, an intent to kill “need exist only for an instant.” Guthrie was convicted of first-degree murder and appealed, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence and the jury instructions defining the elements of murder.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Do jury instructions that define the elements of “wilful, deliberate, and premeditated” as equivalent to an intent to kill that need only exist for an instant improperly eliminate the statutory distinction between first and second-degree murder?

Yes. Jury instructions that equate premeditation and deliberation with a momentary intent 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 nul

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

Do jury instructions that define the elements of “wilful, deliberate, and premeditated” as equivalent to an intent to kill that need only exist for an instant improperly eliminate the statutory distinction between first and second-degree murder?

Conclusion

This decision is a landmark in West Virginia homicide jurisprudence, clarifying 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 e

Legal Rule

To sustain a conviction for first-degree murder, the State must prove that 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

Legal Analysis

The court undertook a historical review of homicide law, noting 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 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 min

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • Redefines Premeditation: Overrules prior law allowing for “instantaneous” premeditation. First-degree murder
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, consectet

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?

If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.

✨ Enjoy an ad-free experience with LSD+