2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 10 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. Piland.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | State v. Piland Anchor | green | “he defendant in this case has not demonstrated any prejudice to him by his absence from a part of the hearing. the evidence elicited was not disputed and there has been no showing that it would have been different had the defendant been present” | 5 |
| 2 | State v. Mavrogianis | green | “he defendant in this case has not demonstrated any prejudice to him by his absence from a part of the hearing. the evidence elicited was not disputed and there has been no showing that it would have been different had the defendant been present” | 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.