# Bates v. State

> Supreme Court of Florida · January 30, 2009 · 34 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 166

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9657573

## Case

- **Full name:** Kayle Barrington BATES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee; Kayle Barrington Bates, Petitioner, v. Walter A. McNeil, Etc., Respondent
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Florida
- **Decided:** January 30, 2009
- **Citations:** 34 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 166; 3 So. 3d 1091; 2009 Fla. LEXIS 142; 2009 WL 217969
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Anstead
- **Judges:** Quince, Wells, Pariente, Lewis, Canady, Polston, Anstead
- **Cited by:** 18 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9657573

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- recognizing that the results of a DNA test for semen in a victim’s vagina could be critical evidence in a rape prosecution
- concluding that DNA was not a significant part of Bates’ conviction considering the weight of evidence against him

## Opinion text

*1108 ANSTEAD, Senior Justice,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I 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.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9657573. Public record. Not legal advice.