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 18 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. Albert Escalante.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. Albert Escalante Anchor | green | “is the preferred alternative to declaring mistrial when a witness makes inappropriate or prejudicial remarks; mistrial is appropriate only where there has been so much prejudice that an instruction is unlikely to cure it.” | 5 |
| 2 | United States v. Victor Montano Disla | green | “may be demonstrated by direct or circumstantial evidence that the defendant had the power to dispose of the drug.” | 4 |
| 3 | United States v. Levi Culps | green | “based on facts specific to the defendant's case,” | 3 |
| 4 | United States v. Levi Culps | green | “seized in two unrelated cases from different parts of the country,” | 3 |
| 5 | United States v. Joshua R. Kilby | green | “the information which supports an approximation must possess sufficient indicia of reliability to support its probable accuracy,” | 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.