3 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 35 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 Saldivar v. State.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Saldivar v. State Anchor | green | “where no defense is presented which would directly affect an assessment of mental culpability, there is no harm in submitting erroneous definitions of 'intentionally' and 'knowingly.” | 16 |
| 2 | Cook v. State | green | “it is error for a trial judge to not limit the definitions of the culpable mental states as they relate to the conduct elements involved in the particular offense.” | 14 |
| 3 | Jones v. State | green | “the intent of jones in touching b.s.s., while it was a part of the state's required proof, was not a contested issue and consequently jones could not be egregiously harmed by the definition of the intentional and knowing state of mind.” | 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.