Legal Opinion
Howell v. State
Tennessee Supreme Court
Decided November 16, 2004No. W2003-01056-SC-R11-PDPublishedCited by 127 opinions
1Opinion of the Court 1
OPINION
2Opinion of the Court · BarkerWilliam M. Barker, J.
in which E. RILEY ANDERSON and ADOLPHO A. BIRCH, JR., JJ., joined. FRANK F. DROWOTA, III, C.J., and JANICE M. HOLDER, J., each filed concurring and dissenting opinions.
This case comes before us on a motion to reopen a petition for post-conviction relief. The petitioner alleges that he is mentally retarded as defined in Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-13-203(a) (2003), and therefore ineligible for the death penalty under Van Tran v. State, 66 S.W.3d 790 (Tenn.2001) and Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304, 122 S.Ct. 2242, 153 L.Ed.2d 335 (2002). The trial court denied the motion,…
3Cases cited37 opinions
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Ring v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by127 opinions
- Vaughn v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 2006
- State v. WereOhio Supreme Court · 2008
- Leonard Edward Smith v. State of TennesseeTennessee Supreme Court · 2011
- State v. MaestasUtah Supreme Court · 2012
- Pruitt v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2005
122 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.