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 12 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. Phillips.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. Phillips Anchor | green | “to a pattern of criminal conduct, not to an individual crime” | 3 |
| 2 | United States v. Gilbert | green | “disagreement with the policy choices underlying the sentencing guidelines and sentencing statutes is not a ground for downward departure.” | 3 |
| 3 | United States v. William O. Steele, Cross-Appellee | green | “moreover, the court must bear in mind the commission's expectation that departures based on grounds not mentioned in the guidelines will be highly infrequent.” | 3 |
| 4 | United States v. Micah Rudisill, Tim Hall Rudisill, A.K.A. Timothy Rudisill | green | “such decisions are reviewable, however, if the district court denies the downward departure because of an erroneous belief that the court lacked the authority to make such a departure.” | 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.