OKLAHOMA ET AL.
v.
NEW MEXICO; COLEMAN V. THOMPSON, WARDEN; RUSSELL V. COLLINS, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION; LAMPF, PLEVA, LIPKIND, PRUPIS & PETIGROW V. GILBERTSON ET AL.; WRENN V. OHIO ET AL.; SCHAD V. ARIZONA; PAYNE V. TENNESSEE; NEWMAN V. UNITED STATES; WAGNER V. SEELY ET AL.; LAGRAND V. ARIZONA; DE LA CERDA V. COLLINS, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION; MILLER V. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION; MORRISON V. BROOKS, SUPERINTENDENT, ROBESON CORRECTIONAL CENTER; ZIEGLER V. CHAMPION, WARDEN, ET AL.; MEEHAN V. METRO NASHVILLE POLICE DEPARTMENT ET AL.; NABKEY V. UNITED STATES; SANDERS V. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ET AL.; SCHMIDT V. UTAH ET AL.; WOLFENBARGER V. KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL AND REHABILITATION SERVICES
OKLAHOMA ET AL.
NEW MEXICO; COLEMAN V. THOMPSON, WARDEN; RUSSELL V. COLLINS, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION; LAMPF, PLEVA, LIPKIND, PRUPIS & PETIGROW V. GILBERTSON ET AL.; WRENN V. OHIO ET AL.; SCHAD V. ARIZONA; PAYNE V. TENNESSEE; NEWMAN V. UNITED STATES; WAGNER V. SEELY ET AL.; LAGRAND V. ARIZONA; DE LA CERDA V. COLLINS, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION; MILLER V. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION; MORRISON V. BROOKS, SUPERINTENDENT, ROBESON CORRECTIONAL CENTER; ZIEGLER V. CHAMPION, WARDEN, ET AL.; MEEHAN V. METRO NASHVILLE POLICE DEPARTMENT ET AL.; NABKEY V. UNITED STATES; SANDERS V. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ET AL.; SCHMIDT V. UTAH ET AL.; WOLFENBARGER V. KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL AND REHABILITATION SERVICES
501 U.S. 1277
Supreme Court of the United States (1991)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases
Opinion
Full opinion text not available for this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Maxwell, 647 So. 2d 871 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)…its a jury’s considering statements concerning personal qualities of a victim in the sentencing phase of a capital trial, unless the evidence is otherwise relevant. In Payne v. Tennessee, 501 U.S. 808, 111 S.Ct. 2597, 115 L.Ed.2d 720, reh’g denied, 501 U.S. 1277, 112 S.Ct. 28,115 L.Ed.2d 1110 (1991), the United States Supreme Court recognized that the eighth amendment is not per se violated by victim impact evidence. And in Hodges v. State, 595 So. 2d 929 (Fla.), cert. granted and judgment vacated on other…
-
Cassidy v. McNeil, 621 F. Supp. 2d 1222 (M.D. Fla. 2008)
-
Brown v. McNeil, 591 F. Supp. 2d 1245 (M.D. Fla. 2008)