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.
6 canonical passages across 6 cases, quoted by 43 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 Apolinar v. State.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Apolinar v. State Anchor | green | “outside the zone of reasonable disagreement.” | 21 |
| 2 | Margraves v. State | green | “required to meet the same rigorous criteria for sufficiency as circumstantial proof of other offensive elements.” | 8 |
| 3 | Reado v. State | green | “to adopt appellant's position would mean that all self-serving statements by an accused would be admissible.” | 4 |
| 4 | Taylor v. State | green | “distinctly set forth the law applicable to the case” | 4 |
| 5 | Hollen v. State | green | “the evidentiary requirements regarding stipulations while avoiding the unfair prejudice that would accompany further mention of the convictions.” | 3 |
| 6 | Castaneda v. State | green | “right to arm and seek an explanation,” | 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.