7 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 32 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 In re Lawrence.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | In re Lawrence Anchor | green | “it is not the existence or nonexistence of suitability or unsuitability factors that forms the crux of the parole decision; the significant circumstance is how those factors interrelate to support a conclusion of current dangerousness to the public.” | 10 |
| 2 | Carl D. McQuillion v. William Duncan, Warden Attorney General of the State of California | green | “california penal code section 3041 vests petitioner and all other california prisoners whose sentences provide for the possibility of parole with a constitutionally protected liberty interest in the receipt of a parole release date, a liberty interest that is protected by the pr…” | 5 |
| 3 | In re Lawrence | green | “constitutes a current threat to public safety,” | 5 |
| 4 | In re Shaputis | green | “the proper articulation of the standard of review is whether there exists 'some evidence' that an inmate poses a current threat to public safety, rather than merely some evidence of the existence of a statutory unsuitability factor.” | 4 |
| 5 | Leland F. Docken v. Doug Chase | green | “could potentially affect the duration of their confinement.” | 3 |
| 6 | Irons v. Carey | green | “shall be found unsuitable for parole and denied parole if, in the judgment of the board, the prisoner will pose an unreasonable risk of danger to society if released from prison.” | 3 |
| 7 | Irons v. Carey | green | “statutes and regulations governing parole suitability” | 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.