WARD

v.

SENTRY TITLE CO., INC.; MMOE V. CROTHERS ET AL.; DAINWOOD V. LYNAUGH, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; STANTON V. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA; GOLDSTEIN V. CRAWFORD ET AL.; U. S. TELECOM, INC., FKA U. S. TELEPHONE, INC., ET AL. V. SPEAKERS OF SPORT, INC., IN RE ASAM, IN RE ASAM, POLYAK V. BOSTON ET AL.; VENCE ET AL. V. BOLIVAR COUNTY COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM, INC., ET AL.; RICHENDOLLAR V. DIAMOND M DRILLING CO., INC., IN RE POLYAK, D'AMARIO V. PROVIDENCE CIVIC CENTER AUTHORITY ET AL.; BROOKS V. LOUISIANA; CULLY V. CUTLIP ET AL.; CULLY V. LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER; WHITEHEAD V. ILLINOIS; KURTZ V. KURTZ; LILES V. OKLAHOMA; PAYNE V. VIRGINIA; PEDRAZA V. HEARD ET AL.; ADAMS V. FLORIDA; WILLIAMS V. CADILLAC INSURANCE CO. ET AL.

Citator

Cited By (172 total)

• Campbell v. State, 571 So. 2d 415 (Fla. 1990)
  …ravating circumstance present where defendant shot victim, reloaded, then resumed shooting). This factor generally is reserved for cases showing “a careful plan or prearranged design.” Rogers v. State, 511 So. 2d 526, 533 (Fla.1987), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 1020, 108 S.Ct. 733, 98 L.Ed.2d 681 (1988). Campbell’s actions took place over one continuous period of physical attack. His assault on Sue Zann provided him with no respite during which he could reflect upon or plan his resumption of attack on Billy,…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Porter v. State, 564 So. 2d 1060 (Fla. 1990)
  …heightened premeditation” to distinguish this aggravating circumstance from the premeditation element of first-degree murder. See, e.g., Hamblen v. State, 527 So. 2d 800, 805 (Fla.1988); Rogers v. State, 511 So. 2d 526, 533 (Fla.1987), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 1020, 108 S.Ct. 733, 98 L.Ed.2d 681 (1988). Heightened premeditation can be demonstrated by the manner of the killing, but the evidence must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant planned or arranged to commit murder before the crime began. H…
• Jackson v. State, 648 So. 2d 85 (Fla. 1994)
  …7, 1109 (Fla.1992). The Court has adopted the phrase “heightened premeditation” to distinguish this aggravating circumstance from the premeditation element of first-degree murder. Id.; Rogers v. State, 511 So. 2d 526, 533 (Fla.1987), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 1020, 108 S.Ct. [*89] 733, 98 L.Ed.2d 681 (1988). The Court has also explained that “calculation” constitutes a careful plan or a prearranged design. Rogers, 511 So. 2d at 533. These explications by the Court malee it clear that CCP encompasses somethi…

  ← 1 / 2 →