4 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 22 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 Phillips v. State.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Phillips v. State Anchor | green | “reasonable investigation of irregularities claimed to have been committed” | 8 |
| 2 | Bascom v. State | green | “where the trial court investigates the circumstances under which the remark was made, its substance, and determines that the rights of the appellant were not prejudiced by the remark.” | 7 |
| 3 | Ex Parte Ciervo. | green | “whether there has been a communication with a juror and whether it has caused prejudice are questions of fact to be determined by the trial court in the exercise of sound discretion.” | 4 |
| 4 | Lauderdale v. State | green | “... when the trial judge acts promptly to investigate the circumstances surrounding the making of an inherently prejudicial remark by a veniremember, determining specifically whether the remark was made and whether the remark had a prejudicial effect on those who, ultimately sel…” | 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.