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.
3 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 27 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. Leyva.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | State v. Leyva Anchor | green | “for substantial evidence to support the district court's factual finding, with deference to the district court's review of the testimony and other evidence presented.” | 13 |
| 2 | State v. Ketelson | green | “appellate review of a motion to suppress presents a mixed question of law and fact.” | 11 |
| 3 | State v. Hamilton | green | “a search pursuant to a valid search warrant establishes that the search was constitutionally reasonable” | 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.