3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 15 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. Barzee.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | People v. Barzee Anchor | green | “in conducting a weight of the evidence review, we must view the evidence in a neutral light and determine first whether a different verdict would have been unreasonable and, if not, weigh the relative probative force of conflicting testimony and the relative strength of conflict…” | 6 |
| 2 | People v. Harris | green | “when assessing the legal sufficiency of a jury verdict, we view the facts in the light most favorable to the people and examine 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 beyo…” | 5 |
| 3 | People v. Barzee | green | “conducting a weight of the evidence review, we must view the evidence in a neutral light and determine first whether a different verdict would have been unreasonable and, if not, weigh the relative probative force of conflicting testimony and the relative strength of conflicting…” | 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.