5 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 23 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. Bunting.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | State v. Bunting Anchor | green | “probably would not survive in the near future.” | 5 |
| 2 | State v. Bunting | green | “a person is subject to a 'basic needs' commitment if clear and convincing evidence demonstrates that, due to a mental disorder, there is a likelihood that the person probably would not survive in the near future because the person is unable to provide for basic personal needs…” | 5 |
| 3 | State v. Bunting | green | “the goal of the commitment statute is safe survival, not merely the avoidance of immediate death,” | 5 |
| 4 | State v. Baxter | green | “by itself, failing to take medication is not sufficient if it causes only a speculative threat.” | 4 |
| 5 | State v. Sea | green | “basic needs are 'those things necessary to sustain life.” | 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.