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.
2 canonical passages across 2 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. Jeremy Bender.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. Jeremy Bender Anchor | green | “this standard requires the appellate court to find that the evidence on a key element of the offense is so tenuous that a conviction would be shocking.” | 8 |
| 2 | United States v. Miguel Orduno-Mireles | green | “put another way, because the prior-conviction exception remains undisturbed after booker , a district court does not err by relying on prior convictions to enhance a defendant's sentence.” | 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.