Legal Opinion

Bell v. Cone

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided January 24, 2005No. 04-394PublishedCited by 478 opinions

1Per curiam

The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit granted a writ of habeas corpus to respondent Gary Bradford Cone after concluding that the “especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel” aggravating circumstance found by the jury at the *448sentencing phase of his trial was unconstitutionally vague, and that the Tennessee Supreme Court failed to cure any constitutional deficiencies on appeal. 359 F. 3d 785, 799 (2004). Because this result fails to accord to the state court the deference required by 28 U. S. C. § 2254(d), we grant the petition for certiorari and respondent’s motion to proceed…

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. Williams v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Gregg v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  3. Ring v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
  4. Bell v. ConeSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
  5. Lindh v. MurphySupreme Court of the United States · 1997

30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by478 opinions

  1. Cone v. BellSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Porter v. Com.Supreme Court of Virginia · 2008
  3. Batiste v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 2013
  4. United States v. Gary Lee SampsonCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2007
  5. Shaneberger v. JonesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2010

473 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API