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.
7 canonical passages across 6 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 United States v. Andres Garcia.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. Andres Garcia Anchor | green | “whether any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the charged offense be- yond a reasonable doubt.” | 3 |
| 2 | United States v. Jesus Malagon | green | “is limited to one that is: (a) rationally based on the witness's perception; (b) helpful to clearly understanding the witness's testimony or to determining a fact in issue; and (c) not based on scien- tific, technical, or other specialized knowledge within the scope of rule 702.” | 3 |
| 3 | United States v. Adel Daoud | green | “sentence falls outside the broad range of objectively reasonable sentences in the circumstances.” | 3 |
| 4 | United States v. Christian Lovies | green | “once a prosecutor has offered a race-neutral explana- tion for the peremptory challenges and the trial court has ruled on the ultimate question of intentional discrimination, the preliminary issue of whether the defendant had made a prima facie showing becomes moot.” | 3 |
| 5 | United States v. Christian Lovies | green | “the honesty- not the accuracy-of a proffered race-neutral explanation.” | 3 |
| 6 | United States v. Hilliard | green | “is limited to one that is: (a) rationally based on the witness's perception; (b) helpful to clearly understanding the witness's testimony or to determining a fact in issue; and (c) not based on scien- tific, technical, or other specialized knowledge within the scope of rule 702.” | 3 |
| 7 | United States v. Jalen Howard | green | “whether the defendant has carried the burden of showing purposeful discrimination-that is, that the govern- ment's race-neutral justification is not credible.” | 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.