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 18 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. Salgado-Mendoza.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | State v. Salgado-Mendoza Anchor | green | “a reviewing court may not find abuse of discretion simply because it would have decided the case differently-it must be convinced that 'no reasonable person would take the view adopted by the trial court.” | 8 |
| 2 | State v. Neal | green | “evidentiary error is grounds for reversal only if it results in prejudice.” | 6 |
| 3 | City of Auburn v. Hedlund | green | “evidence causes unfair prejudice when it is 'more likely to arouse an emotional response than a rational decision by the jury.” | 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.