6 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 41 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 Garza v. Idaho.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Garza v. Idaho Anchor | green | “the right to the effective assistance of counsel.” | 11 |
| 2 | Garza v. Idaho | green | “the effective assistance of counsel.” | 7 |
| 3 | Phillip Griffin v. United States | green | “a fundamental defect which inherently results in a complete miscarriage of justice.” | 6 |
| 4 | Marvin Gabrion, II v. United States | green | “must allege one of three bases as a threshold standard: (1) an error of constitutional magnitude; (2) a sentence imposed outside the statutory limits; or (3) an error of fact or law that was so fundamental as to render the entire proceeding invalid.” | 6 |
| 5 | Dominique Wallace v. United States | green | “interpreted this statutory language (and the accompanying procedural rules) to require a hearing only if a prisoner meets a standard analogous to the summary-judgment test by creating a legitimate dispute over a legally important fact.” | 6 |
| 6 | United States v. David Brown | green | “conclusory allegations alone, without supporting factual averments, are insufficient to state a valid claim under 2255.” | 5 |
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.