6 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 32 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 People v. Schompert.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | People v. Schompert Anchor | green | “was intoxicated to the degree of mania, or of being unable to understand the meaning of his statements” | 13 |
| 2 | People v. Schompert | green | “to the degree of mania, or of being unable to understand the meaning of his statements” | 7 |
| 3 | People v. Dillhunt | green | “still in the process of gathering information about the accident prior to taking any action” | 3 |
| 4 | People v. Kelley | green | “in determining whether a defendant was in custody for miranda purposes, 'the test is not what the defendant thought, but rather what a reasonable person, innocent of any crime, would have thought had he been in the defendant's position” | 3 |
| 5 | People v. Saunders | green | “merely investigatory and did not constitute custodial interrogation to which miranda is applicable” | 3 |
| 6 | People v. Davis | green | “the alleged variations in appearance between the fillers and the defendant were not so substantial as to render the lineup impermissibly suggestive” | 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.