Skip to main content

Rutherford v. State

Citations

  • 940 So. 2d 1112
  • 2006 WL 2884822

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that a 2006 ABA report was not newly discovered evidence because it was “a compilation of previously available information”
  • holding that a 2006 ABA report was not newly discovered evidence because it was “a compilation of previously available information”
  • denying a clemency claim because the defendant had a hearing and because clemency is an executive function
  • denying a similar clemency claim because the defendant had a clemency proceeding and because clemency is an executive function
  • reversing first-degree murder conviction due to prosecutorial misconduct
  • reversing first-degree murder conviction due to prosecutorial misconduct

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Per Curiam

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

34 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.