Case Citation
Legal Case Name

State v. Wanrow Case Brief

Washington Supreme Court1977Docket #85672
559 P.2d 548 88 Wash. 2d 221 1977 Wash. LEXIS 750 Criminal Law Evidence 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: A woman’s murder conviction was reversed because the jury instructions on self-defense improperly restricted the jury’s consideration of past events and applied a standard of reasonableness based on a man’s perspective, failing to account for her unique circumstances.

Legal Significance: This landmark case established that the reasonableness of self-defense must be evaluated from the defendant’s subjective perspective, considering all circumstances known to them, including their physical characteristics relative to the assailant, which is crucial for claims by female defendants.

State v. Wanrow 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

Yvonne Wanrow, a 5’4” woman with a broken leg requiring a crutch, was staying overnight with a friend, Ms. Hooper, for protection. Earlier that day, Ms. Hooper’s daughter identified William Wesler as the man who had previously molested her, and Wesler had also allegedly accosted Wanrow’s son. The police were called but stated they could not arrest Wesler until the following Monday. Wesler was known to be aggressive and had a history of mental illness. Around 5:00 a.m., Wesler, a large and visibly intoxicated man, entered the Hooper residence uninvited and refused to leave. Amid shouting and confusion, Wanrow went to the front door to seek help. Upon turning back into the room, she found Wesler standing directly behind her. Startled, she shot and killed him. At trial, the jury was instructed to evaluate her self-defense claim by considering only the circumstances occurring “at or immediately before the killing.” Wanrow was convicted of second-degree murder and first-degree assault.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Did the trial court commit reversible error by giving a self-defense instruction that limited the jury’s consideration of circumstances to those occurring “at or immediately before the killing” and that applied an objective, male-centric standard of reasonableness?

Yes. The conviction was reversed and the case remanded for a new 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 voluptat

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

Did the trial court commit reversible error by giving a self-defense instruction that limited the jury’s consideration of circumstances to those occurring “at or immediately before the killing” and that applied an objective, male-centric standard of reasonableness?

Conclusion

This case is a foundational authority in criminal law for requiring 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 reprehenderi

Legal Rule

The justification of self-defense is to be evaluated in light of all 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 ve

Legal Analysis

The Washington Supreme Court identified two distinct errors in the trial court's 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 nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo c

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • A police recording of an emergency call is inadmissible as evidence
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

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?

Law school is a lot like juggling. With chainsaws. While on a unicycle.

✨ Enjoy an ad-free experience with LSD+