5 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 26 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Kotteakos v. United States.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Kotteakos v. United States Anchor | green | “the inquiry cannot be merely whether there was enough to support the result, apart from the phase affected by the error. it is rather, even so, whether the error itself had substantial influence.” | 12 |
| 2 | Ford v. State | green | “throughout the interview, ford was handcuffed to a table and maintained that he was not in the neighborhood where was murdered that day.” | 3 |
| 3 | Ford v. State | green | “when asked ford why he was breaking into the house, ford professed that he was only trying to use the restroom.” | 3 |
| 4 | United States v. David Jemal | green | “where a defendant has claimed that he did not distribute drugs at all rather than claiming that he distributed a substance that turned out to be drugs without knowledge that the substance was drugs, the second circuit has precluded the admission of prior crime evidence.” | 2 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.