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.
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 EAR v. State.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | EAR v. State Anchor | green | “a specific finding of the reasons for the decision to adjudicate and to commit the child to the department.” | 3 |
| 2 | R.A. v. State | green | “the supreme court specifically held that the juvenile court's mere regurgitation or parroting of information in the djj's comprehensive assessment and pdr is insufficient to establish acceptable reasons why the court is disregarding those documents and the djj's recommended disp…” | 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.