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 11 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. Elias Gomez Rivera.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. Elias Gomez Rivera Anchor | green | “a district court's findings about the quantity of drugs implicated by the crime are factual findings reviewed under the 'clearly erroneous' standard.” | 8 |
| 2 | United States v. Scott Lee Young, United States of America v. Donald Charles Allman, United States of America v. Michael Allen Crow | green | “take into account uncertainty and the possibility of exaggeration.” | 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.