8 canonical passages across 7 cases, quoted by 50 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 Page v. State.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Page v. State Anchor | green | “distinctive and idiosyncratic manner of committing criminal acts.” | 15 |
| 2 | Segundo v. State | green | “no rigid rules dictate what constitutes sufficient similarities; rather, the common characteristics may be proximity in time and place, mode of commission of the crimes, the person's dress, or any other elements which mark both crimes as having been committed by the same person.” | 13 |
| 3 | Segundo v. State | green | “usually, it is the accretion of small, sometimes individually insignificant, details that marks each crime as the handiwork or modus operandi of a single individual.” | 7 |
| 4 | Cantrell v. State | green | “is the intent to commit robbery applicable to this charge . . . ?” | 3 |
| 5 | Billodeau v. State | green | “because the facts of the charged offense and the extraneous offense were not sufficiently similar.” | 3 |
| 6 | Johnson v. State | green | “intent can be characterized as a contested issue for purposes of justifying the admission of extraneous 7 offense evidence to help prove intent if the required intent for the primary offense cannot be inferred from the act itself or if the accused presents evidence to rebut the …” | 3 |
| 7 | Wiggins v. State | green | “the signature must be apparent from a comparison of the circumstances in both cases.” | 3 |
| 8 | Albiar v. State | green | “the failure to produce available evidence justifies an inference that it would be unfavorable to the party who failed to procure it.” | 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.