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 3 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 People v. Noriega.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | People v. Noriega Anchor | green | “reflect a genuine acceptance of responsibility as required by the risk assessment guidelines developed by the board of examiners of sex offenders” | 12 |
| 2 | People v. Smith | green | “a departure from the presumptive risk level is warranted if there is 'an aggravating or mitigating factor of a kind, or to a degree, that is otherwise not adequately taken into account by the guidelines” | 9 |
| 3 | People v. Quinones | green | “defendant failed to request a downward departure to a level two risk, and thus he failed to preserve for our review his contention that the court erred in failing to afford him that downward departure from his presumptive level three risk” | 6 |
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.