Pros And Cons Of Capital Punishment

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 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

While appealing to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, the petitioner argued, “that the trial court erred in failing to disregard the jury’s answer to the mental-retardation special issue and in denying the appellant’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.” 270 S.W3d 13 (Tex. Cr. App. 2010). The petitioner argued that “because he introduced expert witnesses to demonstrate mental retardation and the State did not introduce its own expert witnesses in rebuttal, the trial court should have disregarded the jury’s answer to the mental-retardation special issue or granted his motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.” 270 S.W.3d 13 (Tex. Cr. App. 2010). The Texas court found that the burden of proof to determine intellectual disability fell to the petitioner and that there was “no authority,

Virginia is that Daryl Atkins was not mentally retarded. I agree with Dr. Stanton Samenow, that Atkins was in the right state of mind to have willingly killed the innocent man without a question. Just because his IQ scores are low from drinking and doing drugs does not make him mentally retarded. I agree with the court’s decision of execution, because I don’t think life in jail is enough for someone like Daryl Atkins. After robbing a poor man and making him go to an ATM to get even more, Atkins just couldn’t walk away with all that money. He just had to go farther and kill a man, after the man did everything Atkins asked and pleaded for his life. That is the kind of man I believe deserves the execution

After Vernon Madison killed Julius Schulte and was sentenced to life in prison with the death penalty, he has had several strokes causing him to forget what happened. His condition now is he is legally blind, has very slurred speech, and he cannot walk by himself. The Court had a unanimous decision to still kill Vernon with the death penalty. A state judge said that the execution should still go on and a federal judge said the same, but a panel of judges in Atlanta said it would break rules in our constitution. The Supreme Court has prevented the execution of people who don’t remember what the did.

Two important cases that both have looked at the death penalty in various ways, may show that capital punishment is not applicable today. In the case Atkins v. Virginia, which took place in 2002, Daryl Renard Atkins was mentally retarded. Atkins was sentenced to death, but he appealed to the Supreme Court. This case takes a look at the question of whether executing a mentally retarded person is constitutional. The court ruled 6-3 that it is not constitutional to kill a mentally retarded person because the nation’s standards are changing and many are against such sentences (“Atkins”). It is clear that the death penalty is being applied less and less, which make it seem that it is no longer applicable today. This opinion is also backed up by the later case, Roper v. Simmons. The case was decided in 2004, but the events date back to 1993. Christopher Simmons was sentenced to death in 1993, but he was only 17. The lower courts ruled for Simmons, stating that the national opinion on killing a minor has changed. However, not many believed the lower court had the power to overrule the Supreme Court’s previous decision on Stanford v. Kentucky. The case went up to the Supreme Court where the court ruled in a 5-4 ruling for Simmons. The Court stated that the standards have changed in the past years, making it so that executing minors is no longer Constitutional (“Roper”). As shown by these cases, the national consensus on the death penalty is changing, which is no longer as necessary as it once may have

Bobby James Moore was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death after shooting a clerk during a robbery. The petitioner challenge his sentenced by arguing that he was intellectually disable and, for that reason, needs to be discharged from the death sentence. The state habeas court concluded, by looking at previous courts decisions Atkins v. Virginia and Hall v. Florida, that Moore was intellectual disable and for that reason recommended to the upper court that the death sentence that Moore received was violating the Eighth Amendment. The upper court, Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (CCA), did not accepted the recommendation of the state habeas court. Instead, the CCA stated that the lower court use invalidated guides and wrongly determine the intellectual disability of the petitioner. The CCA used older guides, called Ex parte Briseno, and with the factors proposed by that guide the court determine that it was sufficient evidence to declare that Moore did not have intellectual deficits. The high court granted the

The article “A Plea to North Carolina: Bringing fairness to the Assessment of Civil Battery Liability for Defendants with Cognitive Disabilities” discusses how individuals with cognitive disabilities should be held liable for their actions. When mentally insane people intentionally attack people, they should be charged for their misdemeanors. Even when successfully pleading insane in a courtroom, they may not have their charges dropped. Chriscoe uses the example regarding the case of Mcguire Vs Almy, where a registered nurse sued one of her patients that attacked her. Even though he was insane, he still had the intent of trying to harm her. Due to this fact, the court ruled that he was liable for his actions. In many cases, courts have to prove

The United States, after the Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty since 1976 the state of Texas is responsible for over a third of executions in the country. However, Moore v. Texas care required grudging and unique approach because it involved a crime committed by a mentally disabled person. Because there Is a claim that the defendant has an intellectual disability the court should consider its influence on a person’s decision.

White was shocked to hear that his execution date was drawing closer because White thought that he was in appeal process. Stevenson petition both the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court to delay White’s execution because his former attorney missed appeals and the failed to procedures (Death Penalty Information Center, 2015). Mr. White’s case is an example how important an adequate representation in a capital punishment trial is to the defendant’s

There are crucial factors to consider when sentencing a human being the death penalty. In the Atkins v. Virginia case, Atkins and Jones were indicted for first-degree murder (Reuters, 2017). The prosecution made Jones plea guilty, in-order to get to testify against Atkins. This made Jones eligible for the death penalty (Reuters, 2017). Atkins would have been put on death row, but a doctor interviewed his family, his correctional officers, looked at his school records, and gave him a free intelligence test. The doctor declared in court, Atkins is mentally retarded (Fabian, 2011; Reuters 2017). To help better understand the reasoning behind the Atkin’s diagnosis, The American Association of Mental Retardation defines mental retarded by, “Mental

State, 833 N.E.2nd 454, it was ruled by the Indiana Supreme Court that the death penalty was not a harsh and uncommon sentence under the Constitution of the state of Indiana and the United States Supreme Court has never included mentally ill murder offenders in the same protection category as the mentally regarded murder

Although medical evidence is not essential to prove the defence of mental impairment, expert opinion is adduced. Jurors are not necessarily bound to accept or act on the evidence but cannot simply disregard such information impulsively unless other evidence casts doubt upon it. Justice Penfold provide directions to the jury and summation of the defence of mental impairment, in particular highlighting how the accused did not comprehend the nature of the act due to the conclusive evidence from the

His last example is that of Tracy Latimer, a 12 year old with cerebral palsy who had the brain capacity of a three month old. Tracy Latimer was killed by her father, who was tried for murder and found guilty of only second degree murder. The judge wanted to give him only an one year sentence, but the Canadian Supreme Court insisted he be given the minimum 25 years. Those who supported the Supreme Court’s decision included the handicapped themselves, who used the argument that it is wrong to discriminate against the disabled to oppose the lenient sentence first given. Mr. Laimer argued that this was not a case of discrimination against the handicapped. He killed his daughter because keeping her alive was torture. She had undergone major surgery and needed