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.
4 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 21 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 Daynel Rodriguez-Penton v. United States.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Daynel Rodriguez-Penton v. United States Anchor | green | “a reasonable probability that, with proper advice, the outcome of those negotiations would have been different.” | 8 |
| 2 | Daynel Rodriguez-Penton v. United States | green | “when the government chooses to enter into plea negotiations, the constitution requires that defendants receive effective assistance in navigating that crucial process.” | 7 |
| 3 | Dominique Dushon Gilbert v. United States | green | “had he known about the risk of adverse . . . consequences, he would have bargained for a more favorable plea.” | 3 |
| 4 | United States v. Karnail Singh | green | “evidence contemporaneous with his plea” | 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.