Connection lost
Server error
COSTELLO v. UNITED STATES 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 defendant was indicted for tax evasion based solely on hearsay testimony presented to a grand jury. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that an indictment is not invalid merely because it is based exclusively on hearsay evidence.
Legal Significance: Establishes the seminal rule that a federal indictment, valid on its face and returned by a legally constituted grand jury, cannot be challenged on the grounds that the evidence presented to it was incompetent or inadequate, including being based solely on hearsay.
COSTELLO v. UNITED STATES 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
Petitioner Frank Costello was indicted for income tax evasion. The government’s case at trial was based on a ‘net worth’ analysis, involving 144 witnesses and 368 exhibits to show that Costello’s net worth had increased more than his reported income would allow. During the trial, cross-examination revealed that the only witnesses who testified before the indicting grand jury were three government agents. These agents had no firsthand knowledge of the financial transactions underlying the charges; their testimony consisted of summaries of the evidence they had gathered from other sources, which was hearsay. Costello moved to dismiss the indictment, arguing that an indictment based exclusively on hearsay evidence was constitutionally invalid under the Fifth Amendment’s Grand Jury Clause. The trial court denied the motion, and Costello was convicted. The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding the indictment was valid despite being based solely on hearsay.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does the Fifth Amendment’s Grand Jury Clause, or the Supreme Court’s supervisory power over federal courts, prohibit a criminal prosecution based on an indictment returned by a grand jury that heard only hearsay evidence?
No. An indictment based solely on hearsay evidence does not violate 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 commo
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 Fifth Amendment’s Grand Jury Clause, or the Supreme Court’s supervisory power over federal courts, prohibit a criminal prosecution based on an indictment returned by a grand jury that heard only hearsay evidence?
Conclusion
This landmark decision insulates federal grand jury indictments from most evidentiary challenges, 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
Legal Rule
An indictment returned by a legally constituted and unbiased grand jury, if 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 aliqu
Legal Analysis
The Court, speaking through Justice Black, rejected Costello's challenge by examining 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 es
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- An indictment based solely on hearsay evidence does not violate the