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 2 cases, quoted by 20 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 Bazzle v. State.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Bazzle v. State Anchor | green | “a requested jury instruction is applicable if the evidence is sufficient to permit a jury to find its factual predicate.” | 11 |
| 2 | Bazzle v. State | green | “the threshold determination of whether the evidence is sufficient to generate the desired instruction is a question of law for the judge.” | 6 |
| 3 | Hoerauf v. State | green | “evidence of flight is defined by two factors: first, that the defendant has moved from one location to another; second, some additional proof to suggest that this movement is not simply normal human locomotion.” | 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.