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 25 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 Gregory Paul JOHNSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Samuel SUBLETT, Respondent-Appellee.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Gregory Paul JOHNSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Samuel SUBLETT, Respondent-Appellee Anchor | green | “the admission of evidence does not provide a basis for habeas relief unless it rendered the trial fundamentally unfair in violation of due process.” | 9 |
| 2 | Richard Boyde v. Jill Brown, Warden of California State Prison at San Quentin | green | “bears a heavy burden in showing a due process violation based on an evidentiary decision.” | 8 |
| 3 | Richard Boyde v. Jill Brown, Warden of California State Prison at San Quentin | green | “admission of evidence violates due process only if there are no permissible inferences the jury may draw from it.” | 5 |
| 4 | Richard Boyde v. Jill Brown, Warden of California State Prison at San Quentin | green | “a habeas petitioner bears a heavy burden in showing a due process violation based on an evidentiary decision.” | 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.