3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 14 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 Schad v. Ryan.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Schad v. Ryan Anchor | green | “absent a clear indication in the record that the state court applied the wrong standard, we cannot assume the courts violated eddings's constitutional mandates.” | 6 |
| 2 | State v. Canez | green | “a causal nexus between the intoxication and the offense is required to establish non-statutory impairment mitigation” | 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.