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. James Douglas Griffin.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. James Douglas Griffin Anchor | green | “consideration of the vindictive prosecution claim necessitates, in some cases, an ad hoc determination of whether the defendant has reason to perceive a vindictive motive.” | 3 |
| 2 | Howard J. And Camilla J. Sherman v. United States | green | “broad inherent powers of district courts to manage their own affairs so as to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases.” | 3 |
| 3 | United States of America, Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. John Stanley, Cross-Appellee | green | “so long as the defendant was free to accept or reject the prosecutor's offer, the prosecutor may carry out his threat.” | 3 |
| 4 | United States v. Juan Rodrigo Gamez-Orduno, Jose Martinez-Carra, Jesus Martinez-Villa | green | “a prosecutor violates due process when he seeks additional charges solely to punish a defendant for exercising a constitutional or statutory right.” | 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.