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.
7 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 State v. Campbell.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | State v. Campbell Anchor | green | “a valid bill of indictment is essential to the jurisdiction of the trial court to try an accused for a felony.” | 5 |
| 2 | State v. Cozart | green | “harsh . . . result of . . . a defendant being deprived of relief from a potentially unconstitutional order.” | 4 |
| 3 | State v. Gonzalez | green | “creation of two lines of irreconcilable precedent.” | 4 |
| 4 | State v. Gonzalez | green | “our supreme court's decision in hilton concluded that for aggravated offenders, such as defendant, the imposition of lifetime sbm causes only a limited intrusion into a diminished privacy expectation,” | 4 |
| 5 | State v. Campbell | green | “a defendant can challenge the facial validity of an indictment at any time,” | 4 |
| 6 | State v. Campbell | green | “an indictment must allege all the essential elements of the offense . . . , but an indictment couched in the language of the statute is generally sufficient.” | 4 |
| 7 | State v. Singleton | green | “the sbm determination hearing has no effect whatsoever upon the defendant's prior criminal convictions or sentencing and is not a part of any 'criminal proceedings' or 'criminal prosecution' of the defendant.” | 4 |
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.