Corralez v. State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that there must be nexus between defendant’s mental health and crime in question in order for mental history to be considered mitigating factor
• holding defendant’s mental illness was not a mitigating factor because there was no nexus between the defendant’s mental health and the crime and “no indication that his mental health was responsible for his decision-making process on the day in question”
• stating there must be nexus between defendant’s mental health and crime in question in order for mental history to be considered mitigating factor
• stating there must be nexus between defendant’s mental health and crime in question in order for mental history to be considered mitigating factor
• stating there must be nexus between defendant’s mental health and crime in question in order for mental history to be considered mitigating factor
• requiring a nexus between defendant’s mental health and the crimes in question for mental history to be deemed mitigating

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).