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.
4 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 State v. Bertrand.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | State v. Bertrand Anchor | green | “defendants argue that the use of non-unanimous verdicts has an insidious racial component, allows minority viewpoints to be ignored, and is likely to chill participation by the precise groups whose exclusion the constitution has proscribed.” | 6 |
| 2 | State v. Wilson | green | “grossly disproportionate to the severity of the offense or constitutes nothing more than needless infliction of pain and suffering.” | 4 |
| 3 | Snyder v. Perilloux | green | “the articulation of the factual basis for a sentence is the goal of article 894.1, not rigid or mechanical compliance with its provisions.” | 4 |
| 4 | State v. Bradley | green | “in reviewing a sentence for excessiveness, the appellate court must consider the punishment and the crime in light of the harm to society and gauge whether the penalty is so disproportionate as to shock the court's sense of justice.” | 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.