7 canonical passages across 7 cases, quoted by 71 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. Tarik Freitekh.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. Tarik Freitekh Anchor | green | “assume that the jury resolved all contradictions in testimony in favor of the prosecution.” | 11 |
| 2 | United States v. Miguel Zelaya | green | “from which 'the jury could reasonably infer that the defendant committed his violent crime because he knew it was expected of him by reason of membership in the enterprise or that he committed it in furtherance of that membership.” | 10 |
| 3 | United States v. Donald Walker | green | “luring or enticing through deceit or insincerity.” | 10 |
| 4 | United States v. Joseph Benson | green | “if the statement of a non-testifying codefendant incriminates another only by virtue of linkage to other evidence at trial-that is, if it incriminates 'inferentially' rather than 'facially” | 10 |
| 5 | United States v. Martin Hunt | green | “a defendant challenging the sufficiency of the evidence bears a 'heavy burden' to overturn his conviction.” | 10 |
| 6 | United States v. Robert McCabe | green | “rule 403 authorizes a trial court to 'exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of,' as relevant here, 'unfair prejudice.” | 10 |
| 7 | United States v. Trevor Seward | green | “to be admissible in federal court, evidence must satisfy both the federal rules of evidence and the u.s. constitution's confrontation clause.” | 10 |
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.