Fabritz v. Traurig Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained скачать в хорошем качестве

Fabritz v. Traurig Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained

Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 42,700 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 988 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o... Fabritz v. Traurig - United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit 583 F.2d 697 (1978) Most crimes require proof of both a criminal action and criminal intent. Can a person be convicted of a crime if there's no proof she knew she was doing something wrong? That's the question in Fabritz versus Traurig. Virginia Fabritz and her three year old daughter, Windy, lived with Thomas Crockett and his wife, Anne. Fabritz left Windy with the Crocketts for three days to travel to her grandfather's funeral. When Fabritz returned, Windy looked unwell. Windy began to complain of cramps. Fabritz thought Windy seemed feverish with the flu, but also noticed multiple severe bruises on Windy's body. Fabritz bathed Windy and put her to bed. Later that afternoon, Windy seemed improved. She had some fluids and sat up for a while. An hour later, however, she vomited. Fabritz gave Windy more fluids and some soda to settle her stomach and put her back to bed. Fabritz called a neighbor for help. When the neighbor came over, she too saw that Windy had a fever. The neighbor asked about Windy's bruises and Fabritz replied, quote, Tommy hits hard, unquote. The neighbor didn't know what was wrong with Windy and left without suggesting medical assistance. Anne came home, and she and Fabritz discussed calling a doctor. Anne telephoned the hospital, and a doctor told her to bring Windy in. Discovering that Windy wasn't breathing, Anne called an ambulance while Fabritz gave Windy mouth to mouth resuscitation. Windy was declared dead on arrival at the hospital. At some point, Fabritz said that she hadn't taken Windy to the hospital because she was too ashamed of the bruises on the child's body. The doctors concluded that eighteen to twenty four hours before her death, Windy had been struck in the abdomen with a blunt object, rupturing her intestine and causing her to die from peritonitis. Fabritz had still been away when Windy was injured. There was no evidence that Fabritz knew that Windy would be abused while Fabritz was gone. Fabritz was charged with child abuse for failing to obtain medical attention for Windy. At trial, the prosecution conceded that Fabritz hadn't struck Windy and didn't know how or when she'd been hurt. Fabritz was convicted and sentenced to five years in prison. The Maryland Court of Special Appeals reversed, but the Maryland Court of Appeals, the state's highest court, affirmed the conviction. The Court of Appeals concluded that Fabritz's failure to obtain medical attention constituted cruel or inhumane treatment under Maryland's child abuse statute and caused Windy's injury. Fabritz filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in federal district court challenging the sufficiency of the evidence. The district court denied Fabritz's petition. Fabritz appealed to the fourth circuit. Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/fabritz... The Quimbee App features over 42,700 case briefs keyed to 988 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o... Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/fabritz... Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here: Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► https://www.youtube.com/subscription_... Quimbee Case Brief App ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o... Facebook ►   / quimbeedotcom   Twitter ►   / quimbeedotcom   #casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries