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.
6 canonical passages across 6 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 for the Best Interest & Protection of C.O..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | State for the Best Interest & Protection of C.O. Anchor | green | “texas courts universally hold that the state must show more than delusions, angry or psychotic behavior, or other facts that merely confirm mental illness” | 3 |
| 2 | State Ex Rel. Ee | green | “the state cannot meet its burden of proof without presenting evidence of the behavior of the proposed patient that provides the factual basis for the expert opinion.” | 3 |
| 3 | Armstrong v. State | green | “rise to the level of an overt act or pattern of behavior that confirms a substantial deterioration of a person's ability to function independently to provide for her basic needs.” | 3 |
| 4 | JM v. State | green | “recent overt act or continuing pattern of behavior proven by the state must relate to the criterion on which the judgment is based.” | 3 |
| 5 | In Re FM | green | “specifically required by the texas health and safety code in addition to expert opinion” | 3 |
| 6 | In the Interest of Breeden | green | “a bald diagnosis alone is insufficient to support commitment.” | 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.