5 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 People v. Acosta.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | People v. Acosta Anchor | green | “there is a valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences from which a rational jury could have found the elements of the crime proved beyond a reasonable doubt” | 10 |
| 2 | People v. Wood | green | “the charged conduct in context” | 3 |
| 3 | People v. Acosta | green | “in a light most favorable to the people to determine whether there is a valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences from which a rational jury could have found the elements of the crime proved beyond a reasonable doubt” | 3 |
| 4 | People v. Adams | green | “was not so inconsistent or unbelievable as to render it incredible as a matter of law” | 3 |
| 5 | People v. Youngs | green | “is not preserved for our review because defendant failed to renew his motion for a trial order of dismissal after presenting proof” | 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.