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 5 cases, quoted by 47 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 Johnson v. United States.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Johnson v. United States Anchor | green | “imposing an increased sentence under the residual clause of the armed career criminal act violates the constitution's guarantee of due process.” | 28 |
| 2 | Price v. United States | green | “we now conclude, consistently with the government's position, that johnson announces a new substantive rule of constitutional law that the supreme court has categorically made retroactive to final convictions.” | 4 |
| 3 | United States v. Eddie Jones | green | “we allow challenges to the sentencing guidelines on vagueness grounds.” | 3 |
| 4 | United States v. Robert Earl Oliver | green | “eliminating from the guideline definition of 'crime of violence' the residual clause.” | 3 |
| 5 | United States v. Robert Earl Oliver | green | “precisely the same analytical framework applied by the courts in ascertaining the scope of a 'crime of violence' under the career offender guideline logically obtains with respect to the question of what kind of conduct comprises a 'violent felony' under the acca.” | 3 |
| 6 | United States v. Cristofer Tichenor | green | “designed to assist and limit the discretion of the sentencing judge.” | 3 |
| 7 | Price v. United States | green | “the supreme court prohibited a certain category of punishment for a class of defendants because of their status” | 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.