Penry V. Lynaugh 2006 Case Analysis

In the case of Atkins v. Virginia, Daryl Renard Atkins is accused of the kidnapping, robbery, and murder of Eric Michael Nesbitt. Atkins was also charged with use of a firearm while committing each of these offenses ("FindLaw's United States Supreme Court case and opinions.”, 2017). Atkins was convicted of capital murder and related crimes, by a Virginia jury and sentenced to death, but his case was appealed to the Virginia Supreme Courts, on the grounds that it is unlawful to put to death a person who has intellectual disabilities (Mental Retardation). Virginia Supreme Courts upheld the decision of the Virginia courts

In 1988 the case of Thompson v. Oklahoma it claimed that the Constitution prohibits execution for crimes committed at age 15. The outcome of the decision was that a State’s execution of a juvenile who had committed a capital offense prior to age 16 violated Thompson unless the State had a minimum age limit in its death penalty. (2) The court decided that juveniles younger than 16 when they committed a crime may not be executed. Wayne Thompson is serving a life sentence in prison without the possibility of parole. Another case in the juvenile death penalty cases is Atkins v. Virginia; The U.S. Supreme Court banned the execution of mentally retarded persons in 2002. Justices ruled that executing mentally retarded criminals violates the Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. The most important

On the fourth of July in 1776 the United States became an independent nation. At that point in time, the foundation for a formal legal system was put into place. One of the oldest sources of law is the common law, which dates back to the colonial days. In the case of Davis v. Baugh, the common law rule was used in the first court trial. Common law refers back to precedent cases of similar disputes and assists the judge in making a decision after comparing both cases. Utilizing this ruling to resolve disputes in court is very helpful because it provides uniformity in court. This rule also provides an expectation of what the verdict will be based off the prior cases. Most importantly, common law allows the judge to remain neutral without the implication of personal bias on each case (Meiners, 2012, pp. 9-10).

In other words, Billy White would have been classified as mentally retarded or intellectually disabled. In 2002 Atkins v. Virginia ruled that executing mentally retarded individuals violated the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. Unfortunately, during the time White was executed there was nothing in place to protect the intellectually disabled.

Today I was able to have a quick interview with the honorable Mrs.Salvarez. I asked her a few questions about what she does in the government and if she could clarify some things.

In his memoir Just Mercy, Bryan Stevenson recounts the stories of several clients whose mental illness was ignored during their trial. Some had intellectual disabilities, others were dealing with the aftermath of severe trauma, but each one was changed in some way. Whether their reasoning had been altered or they simply did not understand what was happening, any crime they committed was closely tied to their mental state. Logically, a major detail like the defendant’s thought process and motivation behind the crime would have been discussed, but this was not the case. Any evidence of their illness was forgotten about or outright ignored by both the prosecution and the defense. When considering each crime with their mental illness in mind, sentencing the defendant to death row is needlessly cruel. Their avoidance of the topic shows a complete failure to understand how important it can be to an individual’s decision-making abilities.

There are laws and decisions of United States government and higher orders that present controversy to the people of America. In the state of Texas the application of the death penalty is difficult to interpret, especially for the mentally ill, because there is no written law or bill that explains the execution implication in complete detail. The death penalty is a capital punishment of death for those who have committed such high crime. This penalty goes for everyone who does such act no matter who you are, how rich how poor, or where you stand in society. For the longest time, even with the mindset and understanding that those who commit crime to a certain level can receive the execution punishment, the concern and debate whether the mentally

In the case of Kennedy V. Louisiana Patrick Kennedy was found guilty in raping and sodomizing his eight-year-old stepdaughter in a Louisiana courtroom. Mr. Kennedy refused to plead guilty and stated the crime was committed by two young boys from the neighborhood. He was convicted sentenced to death 2003. On March 2nd 1988 the victim sustained severe injuries; the injuries required emergency surgery because the rape was so brutal. Louisiana law authorized capital punishment for the rape of a child twelve years and younger. Mr. Patrick Kennedy challenged his sentence under the eighteen amendments as cruel and unusual punishment. The Louisiana Supreme Court declined the challenged that the death penalty was not too harsh for such a wicked crime. In a Supreme Court decision Coker v. Georgia 1977 the United States Supreme Court concluded that capital punishment for rape of an adult women was not applicable if the victim is a child and if it did not result or contemplated in result of a death. The court discussed a number of Supreme Court case related to child vulnerability and the death penalty. In the case of Roper V. Simmons the court ruled that the death penalty could not be applied to a person if the crime was committed when they were under the age of eighteen. In another case, Atkins V. Virginia the death penalty could not be placed on a mentally ill person. The petitioner Kennedy argued that in all these cases they do not establish conformity.

For instance, Justice Kennedy went to considerable lengths to portray the choice as devoted to the court's before decisions, incorporating the one in the Nebraska case. He said that by characterizing the disallowed technique all the more definitely, the government law stayed away from the dubiousness the court had found in the Nebraska statute and in this way did not put specialists at danger of disregarding it incidentally. Second case, Justice Kennedy, tended to the requirement for the wellbeing special case, that it was worthy for Congress not to incorporate anybody to kill an embryo in light of the fact that there was "therapeutic instability" about whether the banned system was ever vital for the purpose of a lady's wellbeing. He said that pregnant ladies or their specialists could state an individual requirement for a wellbeing exemption by going to court to challenge the law as it connected to them, which implies who was ever included in a fetus removal act climate it's a specialist, the casualty, or even the driver you were

The supreme court in Atkins observed that the execution of mentally retarded criminals in the states that permitted it was not common & these acts were unfair.

Virginia, in which a mild mentally retarded man named, “Daryl Renard Atkins was convicted of abduction, armed robbery, and capital murder” ("Atkins v. Virginia."). He was sentenced to death twice but that was overturned by a 6-3 vote by the United States Supreme Court and Justice Stevens had this to say when the verdict came : “Construing and applying the Eighth Amendment in the light of our 'evolving standards of decency,' we therefore conclude that such punishment is excessive and that the Constitution 'places a substantive restriction on the State's power to take the life' of a mentally retarded offender” ("Atkins v. Virginia."). What Justice Stevens is saying is it was no longer socially acceptable to put a mentally retarded person to death any

Along with protests, many people went to trials discussing what was legal, what was an injustice, and many other complaints regarding the issue of slavery. One particular case was the Dred Scott v. Sandford case. Dred Scott was a slave who lived in many places with his owner. Shortly before his owner, Peter Blow’s death, Scott and his owner, moved back to slave territory (OI). Blow sold Scott to Dr. John Emerson just before he died. After working with Emerson, they moved to Illinois, a free state, where they stayed for many years (OI). They then moved farther up North the Mississippi River, where Scott even got married (OI). The Scotts moved back and forth betwixt different states, both free and slaves; Scott’s wife had her child in Fort Snelling

The death penalty need it to also recognize every individual because in certain aspects it could have been seen as cruel and unusual. The question presented to the court was “is the execution of a mentally retarded persons cruel and unusual punishment prohibited by the eighth amendment?”. In an earlier case back in 1989 Penry v. Lynaugh case, the supreme court decided that executing the mentally retarded was allowed and constitutional. In the trial of Atkins v. Virginia, the U.S. supreme court ruled 6-3 that executing a mentally retarded person was unconstitutional. On balance of the supreme court case of Atkins v. Virginia illustrates that the court is a dynamically constrained when doctrinal, institutional, and cultural constraints

Despite the dropping of rate of executions, not all states seem to be benefiting from it. Indeed, the decision was made in 2005 the same year in which four executions took place in the State of Ohio. So based on the DPIC database, five people were executed in 2006, five executions in 2009, and eight during 2010 (1). On the state level, these numbers show that although the United States Supreme Court cancelled the death row for juvenile and mentally handicapped, the number of executions seems hard to be stabilized at lower rates.

The leading cases, CIR v Mitsubishi Motors Ltd [1995] and Commissioner of Taxation v James Flood Pty Ltd [1953] that reflect a taxpayer