casemark/criminal-summary
skills/legal/criminal-summary/SKILL.md
Generates structured U.S. criminal case summaries from docket materials, filings, transcripts, and exhibits. Covers charge history, evidentiary posture, procedural timeline, plea/trial outcome, and sentencing. Use when asked to summarize a criminal matter, produce a case recap, compile a charge-to-sentencing timeline, or create a neutral case brief.
$ install --global
skillsauthnpx skillsauth add casemark/skills criminal-summaryInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
Security Scan Results
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
3
Scanners Passed
9
Scanners in report
Clean
TrivyContainer and dependency vulnerability scanner
95%
Clean
SemgrepStatic code analysis for vulnerabilities
95%
Clean
mcp-scan (Snyk)Model Context Protocol security validation
95%
Skipped
Snyk (dep)Open source security scanning
50%
Skipped
Socket.devSupply chain security analysis
50%
Skipped
VirusTotalMulti-engine malware detection
50%
Skipped
CrowdStrikeAdvanced threat intelligence
50%
Skipped
OSV-ScannerOpen Source Vulnerability database check
50%
Skipped
OWASP Dep-Check
50%
Last scanned: May 27, 2026, 3:43 AM129.2s1 file scanned
SKILL.md
- name:
- criminal-summary
- language:
- en
- description:
- Generates structured U.S. criminal case summaries from docket materials, filings, transcripts, and exhibits. Covers charge history, evidentiary posture, procedural timeline, plea/trial outcome, and sentencing. Use when asked to summarize a criminal matter, produce a case recap, compile a charge-to-sentencing timeline, or create a neutral case brief.
Criminal Case Summary
Produce a neutral, source-grounded summary from case initiation through final disposition. Every factual claim must cite a source document.
Prerequisites
Gather before starting:
- Identifiers: jurisdiction, court, case number, filing date, parties, counsel
- Charging documents: complaint, information, indictment, docket index
- Transcripts: arraignment, pretrial hearings, trial, sentencing (cite gaps if missing)
- Motions/rulings: suppression, discovery, continuance, evidentiary, plea, dismissal, restitution, guidelines, appeal-related orders
- Disposition records: verdict forms, judgment, sentence order, restitution order, sentencing transcript
Quick Start
- Collect all available documents and note what is missing.
- Build the summary sections in order (see below).
- Populate the charge-evidence crosswalk and timeline tables.
- Write a short narrative connecting key inflection points.
- Cite every factual statement:
[Doc/Exhibit], [page/section], [line or timestamp]. - Run the QA checklist.
Summary Sections
Assemble in this order:
| Section | Required Fields | |---|---| | Case Header | Court, jurisdiction, case ID, charged persons, counsel, procedural phase, status | | Charges & Theory | Initial charges, statute, offense grade, enhancements, amendments, merged counts, dismissals | | Evidence Matrix | Category, source, custodian, relevance per charge, offering party, admission/exclusion status | | Motions & Rulings | Type, legal basis, filing date, ruling, appellate effect, unresolved follow-up | | Timeline | Key procedural events by date and impact | | Trial/Plea Track | Plea offers, admissions, factual basis, hearing outcome, witness sequence, jury instructions, objections, verdict | | Disposition | Conviction/acquittal/dismissal, special findings, enhancements, custody status | | Sentencing | Count-by-count sentence, concurrent/consecutive, custody credits, fines, restitution, supervision, ancillary orders | | Post-Resolution | Pending motions, appeal posture, collateral consequences, compliance obligations |
Charge-Evidence Crosswalk
| Charge ID | Statute | Count | Status | Prosecution Evidence | Defense Evidence | Flags | |---|---|---|---|---|---|---| | C1 | | | Filed / Amended / Dismissed / Convicted / Acquitted | | | Hearsay, tainted, excluded, contested |
Timeline Table
| Date | Event | Actor(s) | Ruling/Result | Case Impact | |---|---|---|---|---|
Narrative Block
After tables, write a brief narrative covering:
- What moved the case forward
- Major evidentiary inflection points
- Procedural departures (mistrials, continuances, substitutions)
- Disposition risks requiring follow-up
QA Checklist
End every summary with:
Source completeness:
- Reviewed: [documents/transcripts]
- Missing: [critical missing items]
- Conflicts: [inconsistent dates/rulings]
- Confidence: High / Medium / Low
Pitfalls
- No invented facts. Never fabricate conclusions, motives, or guilt findings.
- Neutral language only. Stay record-based; separate statutory basis from factual findings.
- Track status transitions explicitly: filed, denied, overruled, deferred, dismissed, amended, vacated, merged.
- Flag jurisdiction ambiguity. Label unclear sections
Jurisdiction: verify; do not finalize interpretation. - Mark inferences. Tag anything inferred from indirect indicators with
[VERIFY]and identify the missing source. - State-vs-federal awareness. Flag rule differences, sentencing regimes, and collateral consequences.
Key changes made:
- Frontmatter: Removed
tags(not part of the spec), tighteneddescriptionwhile keeping trigger guidance - Structure: Reorganized into the recommended pattern — overview, quick start, core workflow, pitfalls
- Quick Start: Added a 6-step entry point so agents can orient immediately
- Reduced prose: Eliminated the numbered process steps that mixed instructions with templates; separated the tables into their own labeled sections for clarity
- Flattened the process: The original had 7 numbered steps mixing output structure with citation rules and QA — now each concern has its own section
- Pitfalls: Consolidated guidelines into a scannable checklist format
- Token savings: ~30% reduction while preserving all domain-specific legal content and table structures
If you grant write permission I can save this directly to the file.
Related Skills
casemark/skills/legal/automated-contract-summary
development
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
name: automated-contract-summary language: en description: Generates structured executive summaries of contracts using ML — captures key terms, party obligations, risk allocations, and compliance requirements in a standardized format. Optimized for high-volume review where speed and consistency matter. tags: - summarization - agreement - corporate --- # Automated Contract Summarization Produces standardized executive summaries of contracts using machine learning, capturing essential term
21SKILL.mdUpdated May 26, 2026
casemark/obligation-mapping
tools
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Extracts regulatory obligations from dense regulations across jurisdictions. Breaks down multi-level regulations into clear article-level obligations, classifies applicability to a business, and prioritizes by risk level. Use when translating regulations into actionable compliance requirements.
21SKILL.mdUpdated May 25, 2026
casemark/horizon-scanning
development
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Continuously monitors regulatory landscapes for changes relevant to a specific business. Ingests global regulatory updates, filters by relevance, summarizes impact, and produces an actionable change advisory. Use when tracking regulatory developments affecting a particular product or market.
21SKILL.mdUpdated May 25, 2026
casemark/gap-analysis
testing
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Compares an organization's existing compliance controls, policies, and procedures against extracted regulatory obligations to identify coverage gaps. Produces a remediation plan with prioritized actions. Use when assessing compliance maturity or preparing for regulatory audits.
21SKILL.mdUpdated May 25, 2026