BLAS
v.
ALAMEIDA, DIRECTOR, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ET AL.

U.S. | 2002-06-17
No. 01-9729
536 U.S. 930 Supreme Court of the United States (2002) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Full opinion text not available for this case.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Diaz v. State, 860 So. 2d 960 (Fla. 2003)
    …tal felony must be "especially” heinous, atrocious, or cruel, as section 921.141 (5)(h) explicitly provides. See, e.g., Bowles v. State, 804 So. 2d 1173, 1176 (Fla.2001) (discussing aggravator but not mentioning the word "especially”), cert. denied, 536 U.S. 930, 122 S.Ct. 2603, 153 L.Ed.2d 790 (2002); Rogers v. State, 783 So. 2d 980, 994 (Fla.2001) (same). "Especially” or "especial” is defined as "of special note or importance, unusually great or significant.” Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary 396 (10th ed.1…
  • Bowles v. State, 235 So. 3d 292 (Fla. 2018)
    …t Bowles is not entitled to relief. Bowles was sentenced to death following a jury’s unanimous recommendation for death. Bowles v. State, 804 So. 2d 1173, 1175 (Fla. 2001). Bowles’s sentence of death became final on June 17, 2002. Bowles v. Florida, 536 U.S. 930, 122 S.Ct. 2603, 153 L.Ed.2d 790 (2002). Thus, Hurst does not apply retroactively to Bowles’ sentence of death. See Hitchcock, 226 So. 3d at 217. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of Bowles’ motion. [*293] The Court having carefully considered all a…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw