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 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. Sidney Springs.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. Sidney Springs Anchor | green | “prosecutors need not offer discounts and may withdraw their offers on whim.” | 4 |
| 2 | United States v. Sidney Springs | green | “prosecutors need not offer discounts and may withdraw their offers on whim. defendants have no substantive right to bargain-basement sentences.” | 4 |
| 3 | United States v. Raymond J. Lyons | green | “nothing the defendant said could be attributed to him or used against him, but that the government would be free to follow any leads provided by defendant against him.” | 3 |
| 4 | United States v. Carlos Quintanilla and Leticia Gutierrez | green | “significant, disputed factual issue regarding whether or not the government made a formal or informal grant of immunity to him.” | 3 |
| 5 | Manu Patel v. United States | green | “the government was free to pursue investigative leads contained in his proffer.” | 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.