Skip to main content

Lambrix v. Singletary

Citations

  • 641 So. 2d 847
  • 1994 WL 261439

How courts have described this case

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

  • denying Lambrix’s state habeas petition alleging Espinosa error and ineffective assistance of appellate counsel
  • denying a successive habeas petition that asserted an entitlement to relief based on Espinosa v. Florida, 505 U.S. 1079 (1992), challenged various aggravators, and raised an ineffective assistance of counsel claim
  • denying a successive habeas petition that asserted an entitlement to relief based on Espinosa v. Florida, 505 U.S. 1079, 112 S.Ct. 2926, 120 L.Ed.2d 854 (1992), challenged various aggravators, and raised an ineffective assistance of counsel claim

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Per Curiam

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

21 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.