¶1concurring in part and dissenting in part.
¶2I cannot agree with the majority that Bates is not entitled to have DNA testing of certain evidence in order to bring more certainty to the sentencing process.
3 So. 3d 1091
3 So.3d 1091
34 Fla.L.WeeklySupp. 166
Bates v. State
Decided January 30, 2009
Supreme Court of Florida · decided 2009-01-30
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently May 2017
1 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 2009-01-30
View the full empirical analysis of this case →