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.
7 canonical passages across 6 cases, quoted by 348 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 Buford Dale Fair v. United States.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Buford Dale Fair v. United States Anchor | green | “fundamental defect in the proceedings which necessarily results in a complete miscarriage of justice or an egregious error violative of due process.” | 95 |
| 2 | Ricky Wayne Short v. United States | green | “(1) an error of constitutional magnitude; (2) a sentence imposed outside the statutory limits; or (3) an error of fact or law . . . so fundamental as to render the entire proceeding invalid.” | 81 |
| 3 | Andrew Martin v. United States | green | “an evidentiary hearing is required unless the record conclusively shows that the petitioner is entitled to no relief.” | 49 |
| 4 | Andrew Martin v. United States | green | “the burden for establishing entitlement to an evidentiary hearing is relatively light, and where there is a factual dispute, the habeas court must hold an evidentiary hearing to determine the truth of the petitioner's claims.” | 34 |
| 5 | Virginia Caudill v. Janet Conover | green | “that his lawyers performed well below the norm of competence in the profession and that this failing prejudiced his case.” | 33 |
| 6 | Carson v. United States | green | “a fair assessment of attorney performance requires that every effort be made to eliminate the distorting effects of hindsight, to reconstruct the circumstances of counsel's challenged conduct, and to evaluate the conduct from counsel's perspective at the time.” | 31 |
| 7 | Melvin Turner v. United States | green | “the petitioner's allegations cannot be accepted as true because they are contradicted by the record, inherently incredible, or conclusions rather than statements of fact.” | 25 |
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.