3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 15 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. Marco Betancourt.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. Marco Betancourt Anchor | green | “the existence of a connection to the conspiracy must be shown beyond a reasonable doubt, but the importance of the connection need not be great.” | 7 |
| 2 | United States v. Marco Betancourt | green | “connection to the conspiracy must be shown beyond a reasonable doubt, but the importance of the connection need not be great.” | 4 |
| 3 | United States v. Robert B. French (90-6222) Jay C. Emerson (90-6407) James W. Caldwell (90-6408) Kenneth L. Foster (90-6477) | green | “proof of a formal agreement is not required; it must only be proven that the members of the conspiracy had at least a tacit or material understanding to try to accomplish an unlawful goal.” | 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.