Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 31 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 People v. Martinez.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | People v. Martinez Anchor | green | “whether a punishment is cruel or unusual is a question of law for the appellate court, but the underlying disputed facts must be viewed in the light most favorable to the judgment.” | 12 |
| 2 | Smith v. Municipal Court | green | “the ultimate test remains whether the punishment prescribed shocks the conscience and offends fundamental notions of human dignity.” | 4 |
| 3 | People v. Em | green | “it is so disproportionate to the crime for which it is inflicted that it shocks the conscience and offends fundamental notions of human dignity.” | 4 |
| 4 | People v. Em | green | “under circumstances not of coercion but to a certain extent duress,” | 4 |
| 5 | People v. Gonzales | green | “the lack of a significant prior criminal record is not determinative in a cruel and unusual punishment analysis” | 4 |
| 6 | People v. Martinez | green | “the underlying disputed facts must be viewed in the light most favorable to the judgment.” | 3 |
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.