2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 6 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 Pama v. State.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Pama v. State Anchor | green | “it is not necessary for the state to prove the identification of marijuana by chemical or scientific means.” | 3 |
| 2 | State v. Raulerson | green | “t is not necessary for the state to prove the identity of contraband as marijuana by chemical or scientific proof.” | 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.