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 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. Renzulli.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | State v. Renzulli Anchor | green | “in reviewing a trial court's motion to suppress, we determine whether the record discloses 'substantial evidence of probative value that supports the trial court's decision.” | 7 |
| 2 | State v. Quirk | green | “we do not reweigh the evidence, but consider 'conflicting evidence most favorably to the trial court's ruling.” | 6 |
| 3 | State v. Quirk | green | “when the state appeals from a negative judgment, as here, it 'must show that the trial court's ruling on the suppression motion was contrary to law.” | 5 |
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.