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.
3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 28 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 United States of America, United States of America v. Ray Cowan and Jack Jacobsen, Wayne O. Woodruff, Special Prosecutors.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | In Re United States of America, United States of America v. Ray Cowan and Jack Jacobsen, Wayne O. Woodruff, Special Prosecutors Anchor | green | “clearly contrary to manifest public interest.” | 14 |
| 2 | In Re United States of America, United States of America v. Ray Cowan and Jack Jacobsen, Wayne O. Woodruff, Special Prosecutors | green | “the supreme court intended to clothe the federal courts with a discretion broad enough to protect the public interest in the fair administration of criminal justice.” | 9 |
| 3 | United States v. Robert Hamm, United States of America v. Willis Judge Butler, Les Wallick Fuller, Dayton Bud Evans, Jr. And Larry Dale Washington | green | “is primarily intended to protect the defendant against prosecutorial harassment.” | 5 |
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.