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.
4 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 36 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 Borjan v. State.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Borjan v. State Anchor | green | “designed to arouse the passion and prejudices of the jury and as such are highly inappropriate.” | 23 |
| 2 | Brown v. State | green | “an improper and erroneous interjection of facts not in the record.” | 5 |
| 3 | Brown v. State | green | “each additional comparison added to the incendiary and emotional effect the criminal acts of dahmer, gacy, and bundy had on a reasonable juror's psyche.” | 4 |
| 4 | Brown v. State | green | “in assessing the potentialities at bar, we are unable to say that the cumulative effect of each instance of misconduct was nil or only slight.” | 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.