2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 7 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 Commonwealth v. Schmidt.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Commonwealth v. Schmidt Anchor | green | “after determining that counsel has satisfied the technical requirements of anders and santiago, this court must then conduct an independent review of the record to discern if there are any additional, non-frivolous issues overlooked by counsel.” | 4 |
| 2 | Commonwealth v. Smith | green | “ounsel seeking to withdraw under anders is required to flag any issues that the defendant wishes to raise, as well as any other claims necessary to the effective appellate presentation of those issues.” | 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.