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.
9 canonical passages across 7 cases, quoted by 155 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. Halpin.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. Halpin Anchor | green | “in applying the fletcher factors in the context of an allegedly improper sentencing argument, we consider whether trial counsel's comments, taken as a whole, were so damaging that we cannot be confident that the appellant was sentenced on the basis of the evidence alone.” | 31 |
| 2 | United States v. Baer | green | “the focus of our inquiry should not be on words in isolation, but on the argument as viewed in context.” | 27 |
| 3 | United States v. Bungert | green | “as all three prongs must be satisfied in order to find plain error, the failure to establish any one of the prongs is fatal to a plain error claim.” | 24 |
| 4 | United States v. Frey | green | “trial counsel is entitled to argue the evidence of record, as well as all reasonable inferences fairly derived from such evidence.” | 21 |
| 5 | United States v. Marsh | green | “improper argument is a question of law that we review de novo.” | 18 |
| 6 | United States v. Halpin | green | “during sentencing argument, the trial counsel is at liberty to strike hard, but not foul, blows.” | 14 |
| 7 | United States v. Robbins | green | “military judge is presumed to know the law and apply it correctly, and is presumed capable of filtering out inadmissible evidence . . . .” | 13 |
| 8 | United States v. Robbins | green | “a military judge is presumed to know the law and apply it correctly, is presumed capable of filtering out inadmissible evidence, and is presumed not to have relied on such evidence on the question of guilt or innocence.” | 4 |
| 9 | United States v. Waldrup | green | “in a military judge alone case we would normally presume that the military judge would disregard any improper comments by counsel during argument and such comments would have no effect on determining an appropriate sentence.” | 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.