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.
5 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 27 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 Weems v. United States.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Weems v. United States Anchor | green | “is not fastened to the obsolete but may acquire meaning as public opinion becomes enlightened by a humane justice.” | 10 |
| 2 | Kennedy v. Louisiana | green | “punishment is justified under one or more of three principal rationales: rehabilitation, deterrence, and retribution.” | 7 |
| 3 | Pizzuto v. State | green | “the legislature did not require that the iq score be within five points of 70 or below” | 4 |
| 4 | Hall v. State | green | “buried him in the sand up to his neck to 'strengthen his legs,” | 3 |
| 5 | State v. Vela | green | “the district court found that the defendant's score of 75 on the iq test, considered in light of the standard error of measurement, could be considered as subaverage general intellectual functioning for purposes of diagnosing mental retardation” | 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.