5 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 28 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. Sirico.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | People v. Sirico Anchor | green | “an intoxication charge is warranted if, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the defendant, 'there is sufficient evidence of intoxication in the record for a reasonable person to entertain a doubt as to the element of intent on that basis” | 10 |
| 2 | People v. Buford | green | “grossly unqualified to serve in the case” | 7 |
| 3 | People v. Sirico | green | “a defendant may establish entitlement to such a charge 'if the record contains evidence of the recent use of intoxicants of such nature or quantity to support the inference that their ingestion was sufficient to affect defendant's ability to form the necessary criminal intent” | 5 |
| 4 | People v. Kidd | green | “failed to explain the basis for his general objections” | 3 |
| 5 | People v. Sullivan | green | “there is no reasonable view of the evidence that would support a finding that defendant 'committed the lesser offense but not the greater” | 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.