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 20 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. Curtis Evans.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. Curtis Evans Anchor | green | “affected the outcome of the district court proceedings.” | 6 |
| 2 | United States v. Curtis Evans | green | “fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings” | 6 |
| 3 | United States v. David Lee Oliver | green | “we would be usurping the discretionary power granted to the district courts by booker if we were to assume that the district court would have given defendant the same sentence post-booker.” | 5 |
| 4 | United States v. Alex Vazquez | green | “judge, rather than the jury, determined drug quantity and then sentenced vasquez to . . . a term in excess of his . . . statutory maximum.” | 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.