Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 83 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. Cunningham.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | People v. Cunningham Anchor | green | “testimony may be found insufficient under the jackson standard, but only where the record evidence compels the conclusion that no reasonable person could accept it beyond a reasonable doubt.” | 30 |
| 2 | People v. Cunningham | green | “only where the record evidence compels the conclusion that no reasonable person could accept it beyond a reasonable doubt.” | 26 |
| 3 | People v. Bishop | green | “when reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence, 'the relevant question is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.' (emphasis in …” | 12 |
| 4 | People v. Pineda | green | “however, there is a strong presumption of outcome reliability, so to prevail, a defendant must show that counsel's conduct 'so undermined the proper functioning of the adversarial process that the trial cannot be relied on as having produced a just result.” | 8 |
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.