Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 29 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. Chambers.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | People v. Chambers Anchor | green | “a prospective juror whose statements raise a serious doubt regarding the ability to be impartial must be excused unless the juror states unequivocally on the record that he or she can be fair and impartial” | 12 |
| 2 | People v. Harris | green | “cpl 270.20 (1) (b) provides that a party may challenge a potential juror for cause if the juror 'has a state of mind that is likely to preclude him or her from rendering an impartial verdict based upon the evidence adduced at the trial” | 6 |
| 3 | People v. Henry | green | “where a prospective juror offers such assurances, the trial court has discretion to deny the challenge for cause if it determines that the juror's promise to be impartial is credible” | 5 |
| 4 | People v. Harris | green | “has a state of mind that is likely to preclude him or her from rendering an impartial verdict based upon the evidence adduced at the trial” | 3 |
| 5 | People v. McCoy | green | “having failed to challenge the legal sufficiency of the trial evidence, defendant may not now challenge the legal sufficiency of the evidence before the grand jury” | 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.