skil
.
ski
Skills
SkiPaks
SkiLodge
Pricing
Enterprise
About
Search 200+ Skilskis…
⌘K
Engage
$99/mo
my skills
sign in
1,247
/min
200K
verified
0.91
avg gauntlet
$4.2M
moved (24h)
synced 2s ago
Filters
Filters
Close
tier / self_serve
Self-Serve tier
Skilskis priced $1,200 - $5,000.
search this view...
Search
⌘K
paste a finding / SOP
Paste finding / SOP
✓✓
Operator-Verified only
Verified only
12 of 1,467 verified flagships
+ federated tools →
│
crimdef
×
Self-Serve
×
Cursor
×
clear
skilski-crimdef- · v.static
Brady v. Maryland 373 US 83 (1963) prosecution duty to disclose exculpatory evidence + Giglio v. United States 405 US 150 (1972) extension to impeachment evidence. Materiality standard (Kyles v. Whitley 514 US 419 + United States v. Bagley 473 US 667), team rule (Strickler v. Gre
Skilski Crimdef Pro Brady Disclosure Impeachment
crimdef
·
saves up to $12K
Brady v. Maryland 373 US 83 (1963) prosecution duty to disclose exculpatory evidence + Giglio v. United States 405 US 150 (1972) extension to impeachment evidence. Materiality standard (Kyles v. Whitley 514 US 419 + United States v. Bagley 473 US 667), team rule (Strickler v. Gre
candidate
Pro
included w/ Pro
✦ SkilSki Original
$99
$50
/pro
skilski-crimdef- · v.static
Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause analysis under Crawford v. Washington 541 US 36 (2004) — testimonial-statement bar without prior cross-examination + unavailability + opportunity. Embedded Davis v. Washington 547 US 813 (primary-purpose test), Bullcoming v. NM 564 US 647 (201
Skilski Crimdef Pro Confrontation Cross Examination
crimdef
·
saves up to $12K
Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause analysis under Crawford v. Washington 541 US 36 (2004) — testimonial-statement bar without prior cross-examination + unavailability + opportunity. Embedded Davis v. Washington 547 US 813 (primary-purpose test), Bullcoming v. NM 564 US 647 (201
candidate
Pro
included w/ Pro
✦ SkilSki Original
$99
$50
/pro
skilski-crimdef- · v.static
Federal cooperation framework — pre-sentence USSG §5K1.1 + 18 USC §3553(e) (below-mandatory-minimum) + post-sentence Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35(b) (substantial assistance after sentencing). Embedded cooperation agreement structure (proffer letter, letter agreement, for
Skilski Crimdef Pro Cooperation Rule 35 Substantial Assistance
crimdef
·
saves up to $12K
Federal cooperation framework — pre-sentence USSG §5K1.1 + 18 USC §3553(e) (below-mandatory-minimum) + post-sentence Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35(b) (substantial assistance after sentencing). Embedded cooperation agreement structure (proffer letter, letter agreement, for
candidate
Pro
included w/ Pro
✦ SkilSki Original
$99
$50
/pro
skilski-crimdef- · v.static
Allocution rights at sentencing under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32(i)(4) + state matrix. Defendant's right to address court before sentence, scope of permissible statements, strategic considerations, victim-impact-statement coordination, and appellate consequences of def
Skilski Crimdef Pro Fast And Furious Allocution State
crimdef
·
saves up to $12K
Allocution rights at sentencing under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32(i)(4) + state matrix. Defendant's right to address court before sentence, scope of permissible statements, strategic considerations, victim-impact-statement coordination, and appellate consequences of def
candidate
Pro
included w/ Pro
✦ SkilSki Original
$99
$50
/pro
skilski-crimdef- · v.static
Federal grand jury challenge framework — Costello v. United States 350 US 359 (1956) (limited reviewability), United States v. Williams 504 US 36 (1992) (no obligation to present exculpatory evidence), Bank of Nova Scotia v. United States 487 US 250 (1988) (dismissal standard), s
Skilski Crimdef Pro Grand Jury Indictment Challenge
crimdef
Pro
✦ SkilSki Original
$50
skilski-crimdef- · v.static
Miranda v. Arizona 384 US 436 (1966) custodial-interrogation safeguards + Edwards v. Arizona 451 US 477 (1981) post-invocation re-initiation rule. Embedded custody analysis (J.D.B. v. NC 564 US 261), interrogation analysis (Rhode Island v. Innis 446 US 291), waiver standards (Ber
Skilski Crimdef Pro Miranda Mens Rea Edwards
crimdef
Pro
✦ SkilSki Original
$50
skilski-crimdef- · v.static
Padilla v. Kentucky 559 US 356 (2010) duty to advise noncitizen clients of immigration consequences before plea. Categorical approach (Descamps + Mathis + Mellouli) for crime classification, retroactivity (Chaidez v. US 568 US 342 (2013) — Padilla NOT retroactive on collateral re
Skilski Crimdef Pro Padilla Collateral Noncitizen
crimdef
Pro
✦ SkilSki Original
$50
skilski-crimdef- · v.static
Mandatory Victims Restitution Act (MVRA) under 18 USC §3663A + 18 USC §3664 procedure. Mandatory restitution for crimes of violence + property offenses; victim identification; loss calculation; ability to pay (Bearden v. Georgia 461 US 660); priority of payments; offset against c
Skilski Crimdef Pro Restitution Mvra Applicable
crimdef
Pro
✦ SkilSki Original
$50
skilski-crimdef- · v.static
Federal sentencing departure + variance framework under United States Sentencing Guidelines (USSG) + 18 USC §3553(a). Embedded post-Booker advisory-Guidelines doctrine (United States v. Booker 543 US 220 (2005)), §3553(a) factor analysis, departures vs variances distinction, comm
Skilski Crimdef Pro Sentencing Guideline Departure
crimdef
Pro
✦ SkilSki Original
$50
skilski-crimdef- · v.static
Strickland v. Washington 466 US 668 (1984) two-prong ineffective assistance of counsel (IAC) test — deficient performance + prejudice. Embedded AEDPA deference (28 USC §2254(d) + Harrington v. Richter 562 US 86), strong presumption of competence, prejudice "reasonable probability
Skilski Crimdef Pro Strickland Prejudice Prong
crimdef
Pro
✦ SkilSki Original
$50
skilski-crimdef- · v.static
Federal supervised release revocation under 18 USC §3583(e) + Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1. Embedded categorical-approach challenges to violation classification (Johnson v. United States 576 US 591 (2015) — residual clause vagueness; Welch v. United States 578 US 120 (
Skilski Crimdef Pro Supervised Release Revocation Johnson
crimdef
Pro
✦ SkilSki Original
$50
skilski-crimdef- · v.static
Fourth Amendment suppression motion for traffic stops — Whren v. US 517 US 806 (1996) (pretextual stop standard) + Rodriguez v. US 575 US 348 (2015) (de minimis stop extension violates 4th Amendment) + Terry v. Ohio 392 US 1 (1968) (reasonable suspicion) + Heien v. NC 574 US 54 (
Skilski Crimdef Pro Suppression Fourth Amendment Traffic
crimdef
Pro
✦ SkilSki Original
$50
Built 1467+. Need #1468?
We'll build it →