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 3 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. Chapman.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. Chapman Anchor | green | “a determination of manifest necessity may be upheld even if other reasonable trial judges might have proceeded with the trial despite the error.” | 3 |
| 2 | United States v. Chapman | green | “a rational jurist could have made based on the record.” | 3 |
| 3 | Gaitor v. State | green | “the failure of defense counsel to object or express an opinion to the district court regarding the propriety of the mistrial implied consent and indicated tacit approval” | 3 |
| 4 | Meyer v. State | green | “absent clear error, the district court's findings of fact will not be disturbed.” | 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.