3 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 11 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. Venegas.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | People v. Venegas Anchor | green | “having any tendency in reason to prove or disprove any disputed fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action.” | 5 |
| 2 | People v. Feagin | green | “when i came in . . . looking at the defendant and everything that was presented before me, there was a feeling before the process started.” | 3 |
| 3 | Rodriguez v. State | green | “dna nonexclusion evidence is admissible in the absence of supporting statistical data reflecting the percentage of the population that could be excluded as long as the nonexclusion evidence is relevant, because any danger of unfair prejudice or of misleading the jury is substant…” | 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.