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.
5 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 19 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 Darryl Gumm v. Betty Mitchell.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Darryl Gumm v. Betty Mitchell Anchor | green | “the habeas petitioner has the burden of rebutting, by clear and convincing evidence, the presumption that the state court's factual findings were correct.” | 6 |
| 2 | United States v. Miller | green | “stifled his ability to communicate with his counsel due to the threat of being electrocuted,” | 4 |
| 3 | Leonard v. Warden, Ohio State Penitentiary | green | “daniel has not established an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law.” | 3 |
| 4 | Leonard v. Warden, Ohio State Penitentiary | green | “we cannot find any supreme court precedent that speaks to the psychological impact of non-visible restraints and their interference with a defendant's ability to present a fair defense or consult with counsel.” | 3 |
| 5 | United States v. Orris | green | “there is no indication whatsoever in the record that the shackling prevented the defendant from consulting with his attorney” | 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.