7 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 26 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 Guzman v. State.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Guzman v. State Anchor | green | “if there is any reasonable likelihood that the false testimony could have affected the judgment of the jury.” | 6 |
| 2 | Guzman v. State | green | “the false evidence is material 'if there is any reasonable likelihood that the false testimony could have affected the judgment of the jury.” | 5 |
| 3 | United States v. Jorge Luis Alzate | green | “is substantially more difficult for a defendant to meet than the 'could 43 have affected' standard” | 3 |
| 4 | Trepal v. State | green | “although this is a circumstantial evidence case, the evidence was strong.” | 3 |
| 5 | Trepal v. State | green | “any claim that was adjudicated on the merits in state court proceedings unless the adjudication of the claim” | 3 |
| 6 | Trepal v. State | green | “based on those two tests i.e., dp and ic, is it your opinion that what was in those three coca-colas, sir, was thallium nitrate?” | 3 |
| 7 | Pittman v. State | green | “harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.” | 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.