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.
3 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 17 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. Daniel Kemp, Sr..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. Daniel Kemp, Sr. Anchor | green | “outlines the requirements for a district court plea colloquy, designed to ensure that a defendant 'understands the law of his crime in relation to the facts of his case, as well as his rights as a criminal defendant.” | 9 |
| 2 | United States v. Darrius King | green | “only if it 'seriously affects the fairness, integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings.” | 4 |
| 3 | United States v. Lamar Perdue | green | “to satisfy this third condition, the defendant must show a reasonable probability that, but for the error, the outcome of the proceeding would have been different.” | 4 |
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.