The Briseño Factors

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

The two important court rulings were the Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children v. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in 1971 and Mills vs. The Board of Education of the District of Columbia in 1972 (ERIC Clearinghouse, 1998). These court decisions showed that “the responsibility of States and local school districts to educate individuals with disabilities is derived from the equal protection law of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution.”(ERIC Clearinghouse, 1998, n.p.)

the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq., and the

This paper discusses the pros and cons of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS-III). First, important definitional, theoretical issues, including the nature of intelligence, a brief history, and pros and cons are discussed. Next, the development, reliability, validity, and assets and limitations of the WAIS-III are examined. This is followed by discussion of the meaning of IQ scores, use of successive level interpretation and cautions and guidelines for administration. Last, subtests, assessing special population groups, short forms, profile forms, and what a

The presence of medical conditions, classified as disabilities by the Americans with Disabilities Act as, “…a physical or mental impairment that

This case was a very significant ruling for special education evident with numerous studies positing that the ruling of this 1982 case was perhaps the most important special education decision by the Supreme Court and to this day, continues to have a profound effect on the education of students with disabilities. Additionally, this was the first time that the Supreme Court had to interpret portions of the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA 1990), which was then the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA) as it relates to what constituted a free and appropriate education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment (LRE).

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, 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

When sentencing an offender for a crime, the punishment depends on what the law is attempting to accomplish. The punishment can either be based on incapacitation, retribution, rehabilitation, deterrence, or restorative. Depending on the crime, the punishment can accomplish either one of several of them. However, when it comes to the death penalty it can be quite debatable and there are several criminal cases that came to the United States supreme court due to potential policies being violated that would prevent the offender from getting a proper conviction. One US Supreme Court case that had an issue in sentencing a defendant is Atkins v. Virginia. This case of Atkins v. Virginia (2002) is significant because it had to do with sentencing a defendant to death but was called for an appeal due to the defendant being intellectually disabled. The court case also added that executing individuals who are intellectually disabled is unconstitutional within the eighth amendment that protects against cruel and unusual punishment. When it comes to mental retardation it can have effects on the punishment and corrections system due to the level of their mental competence and how well a defendant who does have disabilities can understand the law. To better understand how mental retardation within the punishment and corrections system can influence the way they work the following should be examined and analyzed. First, the nature of the USSC case must be examined and explain why the supreme

The lower court focused on the factors of Briseno (1992) which were applied without the presence of a doctor in the moment of the recitation, which was incorrect. Also, the CCA did not applied the standard error of measurement in the IQ test, which under Hall v. Florida needs to be apply if the IQ score is between 69 and 79. If the test score is between the IQ test ranges, the person(s) will be qualify as intellectually disable. In addition, the Court sustain that is necessary to view and get support from other medical guides that are recent to prove the defendant is intellectually disable, instead to convict someone just by looking to a test score and old guides. For the reason that, the court declared that the CCA fail to applied current medical guidance and the decision that the court made was a violation of the Eight

the effects of a particular disability; it must be based on an individual assessment that

States are not limited to adopting the latests definitions of intellectual disability that have been published by certain organizations. Atkins v. Virginia, granted States the freedom to define intellectual disability within certain limits based on their own laws. The courts have given legislators the tasks to determine the definition of medical terms that have a significance to legal situations. In the precedent decided in Atkins v. Virginia, it was acknowledged that it's still difficult to determine if and which offenders of the law have intellectual disabilities because the case only extended its rule to a certain extent of offenders. Also, the court noticed the definitions of intellectual disabilities varied from the state to actual clinical

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

The argument of mental disability causing one to kill has been around for centuries. Now once again it has arisen in a murder trial. I do not disagree that mental disabilities can cause someone to kill, but if there are no records and the family of the suspect suddenly claims there to be one then I am skeptical. In Bellafonte, Ohio three young boys were killed out of jealousy. Brittany Pilkington, 23 years old, admitted to killing her three sons due to a disability that does not exist.

On the other hand, one could easily argue that the standards set forth by the Briseño Factors are unconstitutional, due to the fact that the standards do not require the court to consider the individual’s IQ when determining the whether the individual does indeed have an intellectual disability. However, in 2002, the Supreme Court ruling in Atkins v. Virginia stated that “an IQ of under “approximately 70” demonstrates disability.”