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.
6 canonical passages across 6 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. Mitchell.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. Mitchell Anchor | green | “to find reversible error under the plain error standard, we must conclude that (1) an error occurred, (2) the error was plain, and (3) the error affected substantial rights.” | 3 |
| 2 | United States v. Hernandez | green | “we note that this court may affirm the district court where the judgment entered is correct on any legal ground regardless of the grounds addressed, adopted or rejected by the district court.” | 3 |
| 3 | United States v. LaFortune | green | “it was the specific rather than the general pointing of the gun that elevated its use from mere 'brandishment' to 'otherwise used.” | 3 |
| 4 | United States v. Alberto Martinez, AKA \Tico\" United States of America v. David Kerrick | green | “a necessary or natural consequence of the unlawful agreement.” | 3 |
| 5 | United States v. Jerry Washington and Herbert Edward James | green | “an enhancement is entirely proper because two armed men pose a much greater threat to public safety than does one.” | 3 |
| 6 | United States v. Luis Rodriguez | green | “enhancement for a separate weapons possession, such as that of a co-conspirator” | 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.