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 4 cases, quoted by 40 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 Thomas v. State.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Thomas v. State Anchor | green | “a substantial right is affected when the error had a substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury's verdict.” | 19 |
| 2 | State of Texas v. Duarte, Gilbert | green | “on the combined logical force of facts that actually are in the affidavit.” | 6 |
| 3 | Jennings v. State | green | “if a warrant authorizes a search for both 'mere evidence' and items listed under another ground for search and seizure, the warrant is not a mere-evidentiary search warrant,” | 5 |
| 4 | Vincent Lamon Williams v. State | green | “whether a defendant had a sufficient proprietary or possessory interest in the place or object searched.” | 4 |
| 5 | Vincent Lamon Williams v. State | green | “had a sufficient proprietary or possessory interest in the place or object searched.” | 3 |
| 6 | Vincent Lamon Williams v. State | green | “the standard would be whether the person had a sufficient proprietary or possessory interest in this place or object searched.” | 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.