atkins virginia argued february decided june petitioner atkins convicted capital murder related crimes virginia jury sentenced death affirming virginia relied penry lynaugh rejecting atkins contention sentenced death mentally retarded held executions mentally retarded criminals cruel unusual punishments prohibited eighth amendment pp punishment excessive therefore prohibited amendment graduated proportioned offense weems excessiveness claim judged currently prevailing standards decency trop dulles proportionality review evolving standards informed objective factors maximum possible extent see harmelin michigan clearest reliable legislation enacted country legislatures penry pp much changed since penry conclusion two state statutes existing prohibited executions even added rejected capital punishment completely provide sufficient evidence consensus subsequently significant number concluded death suitable punishment mentally retarded criminal similar bills passed least one house much number significant consistency direction change given anticrime legislation far popular legislation protecting violent criminals large number prohibiting execution mentally retarded persons complete absence legislation reinstating executions provides powerful evidence today society views mentally retarded offenders categorically less culpable average criminal evidence carries even greater force noted legislatures addressing issue voted overwhelmingly favor prohibition moreover even allowing execution mentally retarded offenders practice uncommon pp independent evaluation issue reveals reason disagree legislative consensus clinical definitions mental retardation require subaverage intellectual functioning also significant limitations adaptive skills mentally retarded persons frequently know difference right wrong competent stand trial definition diminished capacities understand process information communicate abstract mistakes learn experience engage logical reasoning control impulses understand others reactions deficiencies warrant exemption criminal sanctions diminish personal culpability light deficiencies death penalty jurisprudence provides two reasons agree legislative consensus first serious question whether either justification underpinning death penalty retribution deterrence capital crimes applies mentally retarded offenders retribution severity appropriate punishment necessarily depends offender culpability culpability average murderer insufficient justify imposition death see godfrey georgia lesser culpability mentally retarded offender surely merit form retribution deterrence cognitive behavioral impairments make mentally retarded defendants less morally culpable also make less likely process information possibility execution penalty result control conduct based upon information exempting mentally retarded execution lessen death penalty deterrent effect respect offenders mentally retarded second mentally retarded defendants aggregate face special risk wrongful execution possibility unwittingly confess crimes commit lesser ability give counsel meaningful assistance facts typically poor witnesses demeanor may create unwarranted impression lack remorse crimes pp reversed remanded stevens delivered opinion kennedy souter ginsburg breyer joined rehnquist filed dissenting opinion scalia thomas joined scalia filed dissenting opinion rehnquist thomas joined daryl renard atkins petitioner virginia writ certiorari virginia june justice stevens delivered opinion mentally retarded persons meet law requirements criminal responsibility tried punished commit crimes disabilities areas reasoning judgment control impulses however act level moral culpability characterizes serious adult criminal conduct moreover impairments jeopardize reliability fairness capital proceedings mentally retarded defendants presumably reasons years since decided penry lynaugh american public legislators scholars judges deliberated question whether death penalty ever imposed mentally retarded criminal consensus reflected deliberations informs answer question presented case whether executions cruel unusual punishments prohibited eighth amendment federal constitution petitioner daryl renard atkins convicted abduction armed robbery capital murder sentenced death approximately midnight august atkins william jones armed semiautomatic handgun abducted eric nesbitt robbed money person drove automated teller machine pickup truck cameras recorded withdrawal additional cash took isolated location shot eight times killed jones atkins testified guilt phase atkins confirmed details account incident important exception stated actually shot killed nesbitt jones testimony coherent credible atkins obviously credited jury sufficient establish atkins penalty phase trial state introduced victim impact evidence proved two aggravating circumstances future dangerousness vileness offense prove future dangerousness state relied atkins prior felony convictions well testimony four victims earlier robberies assaults prove second aggravator prosecution relied upon trial record including pictures deceased body autopsy report penalty phase defense relied one witness evan nelson forensic psychologist evaluated atkins trial concluded mildly mentally retarded conclusion based interviews people knew review school records administration standard intelligence test indicated atkins full scale iq jury sentenced atkins death virginia ordered second sentencing hearing trial used misleading verdict form resentencing nelson testified state presented expert rebuttal witness stanton samenow expressed opinion atkins mentally retarded rather average intelligence least diagnosable antisocial personality app jury sentenced atkins death virginia affirmed imposition death penalty atkins argue virginia sentence disproportionate penalties imposed similar crimes virginia contend mentally retarded thus sentenced death majority state rejected contention relying holding penry willing commute atkins sentence death life imprisonment merely iq score justice hassell justice koontz dissented rejected samenow opinion atkins possesses average intelligence incredulous matter law concluded imposition sentence death upon criminal defendant mental age child ages excessive opinion indefensible conclude individuals mentally retarded degree less culpable criminal acts definition individuals substantial limitations shared general population moral civilized society diminishes system justice afford recognition consideration limitations meaningful way gravity concerns expressed dissenters light dramatic shift state legislative landscape occurred past years granted certiorari revisit issue first addressed penry case ii eighth amendment succinctly prohibits excessive sanctions provides excessive bail shall required excessive fines imposed cruel unusual punishments inflicted weems held punishment years jailed irons hard painful labor crime falsifying records excessive explained precept justice punishment crime graduated proportioned offense repeatedly applied proportionality precept later cases interpreting eighth amendment see harmelin michigan kennedy concurring part concurring judgment see also white dissenting thus even though imprisonment ninety days abstract punishment either cruel unusual may imposed penalty status narcotic addiction robinson california sanction excessive justice stewart explained robinson even one day prison cruel unusual punishment crime common cold claim punishment excessive judged standards prevailed lord jeffreys presided bloody assizes bill rights adopted rather currently prevail chief justice warren explained opinion trop dulles basic concept underlying eighth amendment nothing less dignity man amendment must draw meaning evolving standards decency mark progress maturing society proportionality review evolving standards informed objective factors maximum possible extent see harmelin pinpointed clearest reliable objective evidence contemporary values legislation enacted country legislatures penry defendant neither took life attempted take life intended take life enmund florida coker focused primarily legislation enacted response decision years earlier furman georgia per curiam support conclusion current judgment though wholly unanimous weighed heavily side rejecting capital punishment suitable penalty raping adult woman coker current legislative judgment relevant decision enmund less clear coker nevertheless weigh ed side rejecting capital punishment crime issue enmund also acknowledged coker objective evidence though great importance wholly determine controversy constitution contemplates end judgment brought bear question acceptability death penalty eighth amendment example enmund concluded expressing judgment issue purposes imposing death penalty enmund criminal culpability must limited participation robbery punishment must tailored personal responsibility moral guilt putting enmund death avenge two killings commit intention committing causing measurably contribute retributive end ensuring criminal gets deserts judgment legislatures recently addressed matter reason disagree judgment purposes construing applying eighth amendment emphasis added thus cases involving consensus judgment brought bear coker asking whether reason disagree judgment reached citizenry legislators guided approach cases shall first review judgment legislatures addressed suitability imposing death penalty mentally retarded consider reasons agreeing disagreeing judgment iii parties called attention state legislative consideration suitability imposing death penalty mentally retarded offenders prior year public reaction execution mentally retarded murderer apparently led enactment first state statute prohibiting congress enacted legislation reinstating federal death penalty expressly provided sentence death shall carried upon person mentally retarded maryland enacted similar year decided penry concluded two state enactments even added rejected capital punishment completely provide sufficient evidence present national consensus much changed since responding national attention received bowden execution decision penry state legislatures across country began address issue kentucky tennessee enacted statutes similar georgia maryland new mexico arkansas colorado washington indiana kansas new york reinstated death penalty emulated federal government expressly exempting mentally nebraska followed suit appear similar enactments next two years six south dakota arizona connecticut florida missouri north carolina joined texas legislature unanimously adopted similar bills passed least one house including virginia much number significant consistency direction given fact anticrime legislation far popular legislation providing protections persons guilty violent crime large number prohibiting execution mentally retarded persons complete absence passing legislation reinstating power conduct executions provides powerful evidence today society views mentally retarded offenders categorically less culpable average criminal evidence carries even greater force noted legislatures addressed issue voted overwhelmingly favor moreover even allow execution mentally retarded offenders practice uncommon example new hampshire new jersey continue authorize executions none carried decades thus little need pursue legislation barring execution mentally retarded appears even among regularly execute offenders prohibition regard mentally retarded five executed offenders possessing known iq less since decided practice therefore become truly unusual fair say national consensus developed extent serious disagreement execution mentally retarded offenders determining offenders fact retarded case instance commonwealth virginia disputes atkins suffers mental retardation people claim mentally retarded impaired fall within range mentally retarded offenders national consensus approach ford wainwright regard insanity leave state task developing appropriate ways enforce constitutional restriction upon execution sentences iv consensus unquestionably reflects widespread judgment relative culpability mentally retarded offenders relationship mental retardation penological purposes served death penalty additionally suggests characteristics mental retardation undermine strength procedural protections capital jurisprudence steadfastly guards discussed clinical definitions mental retardation require subaverage intellectual functioning also significant limitations adaptive skills communication became manifest age mentally retarded persons frequently know difference right wrong competent stand trial impairments however definition diminished capacities understand process information communicate abstract mistakes learn experience engage logical reasoning control impulses understand reactions evidence likely engage criminal conduct others abundant evidence often act impulse rather pursuant premeditated plan group settings followers rather deficiencies warrant exemption criminal sanctions diminish personal culpability light deficiencies death penalty jurisprudence provides two reasons consistent legislative consensus mentally retarded categorically excluded execution first serious question whether either justification recognized basis death penalty applies mentally retarded offenders gregg georgia identified retribution deterrence capital crimes prospective offenders social purposes served death penalty unless imposition death penalty mentally retarded person measurably contributes one goals nothing purposeless needless imposition pain suffering hence unconstitutional punishment enmund respect retribution interest seeing offender gets deserts severity appropriate punishment necessarily depends culpability offender since gregg jurisprudence consistently confined imposition death penalty narrow category serious crimes example godfrey georgia set aside death sentence petitioner crimes reflect consciousness materially depraved person guilty murder culpability average murderer insufficient justify extreme sanction available state lesser culpability mentally retarded offender surely merit form retribution thus pursuant narrowing jurisprudence seeks ensure deserving execution put death exclusion mentally retarded appropriate respect deterrence interest preventing capital crimes prospective offenders seems likely capital punishment serve deterrent murder result premeditation deliberation enmund exempting mentally retarded punishment affect cold calculus precedes decision potential murderers gregg indeed sort calculus opposite end spectrum behavior mentally retarded offenders theory deterrence capital sentencing predicated upon notion increased severity punishment inhibit criminal actors carrying murderous conduct yet cognitive behavioral impairments make defendants less morally culpable example diminished ability understand process information learn experience engage logical reasoning control impulses also make less likely process information possibility execution penalty result control conduct based upon information exempting mentally retarded execution lessen deterrent effect death penalty respect offenders mentally retarded individuals unprotected exemption continue face threat execution thus executing mentally retarded measurably goal deterrence reduced capacity mentally retarded offenders provides second justification categorical rule making offenders ineligible death penalty risk death penalty imposed spite factors may call less severe penalty lockett ohio enhanced possibility false also lesser ability mentally retarded defendants make persuasive showing mitigation face prosecutorial evidence one aggravating factors mentally retarded defendants may less able give meaningful assistance counsel typically poor witnesses demeanor may create unwarranted impression lack remorse crimes penry demonstrated moreover reliance mental retardation mitigating factor sword may enhance likelihood aggravating factor future dangerousness found jury mentally retarded defendants aggregate face special risk wrongful execution independent evaluation issue reveals reason disagree judgment legislatures recently addressed matter concluded death suitable punishment mentally retarded criminal persuaded execution mentally retarded criminals measurably advance deterrent retributive purpose death penalty construing applying eighth amendment light evolving standards decency therefore conclude punishment excessive constitution places substantive restriction state power take life mentally retarded offender ford judgment virginia reversed case remanded proceedings inconsistent opinion ordered daryl renard atkins petitioner virginia writ certiorari virginia june chief justice rehnquist justice scalia justice thomas join dissenting question presented case whether national consensus deprives virginia constitutional power impose death penalty capital murder defendants like petitioner defendants indisputably competent stand trial aware punishment suffer whose mental retardation found insufficiently compelling reason lessen individual responsibility crime pronounces punishment cruel unusual primarily recently passed laws limiting death eligibility certain defendants based mental retardation alone despite fact laws besides virginia continue leave question proper punishment individuated consideration sentencing judges juries familiar particular offender crime see ante agree justice scalia post dissenting opinion assessment current legislative judgment regarding execution defendants like petitioner resembles post hoc rationalization majority subjectively preferred result rather objective effort ascertain content evolving standard decency write separately however call attention defects decision place weight foreign laws views professional religious organizations opinion polls reaching conclusion see ante suggestion sources relevant constitutional question finds little support precedents view antithetical considerations federalism instruct permanent prohibition upon units democratic government must apparent operative acts laws application laws people approved stanford kentucky plurality opinion uncritical acceptance opinion poll data brought attention moreover warrants additional comment lack sufficient information conclude surveys conducted accordance generally accepted scientific principles capable supporting valid empirical inferences issue us making determinations whether punishment cruel unusual evolving standards decency embraced eighth amendment emphasized legislation clearest reliable objective evidence contemporary values penry lynaugh see also mccleskey kemp reason ascribe primacy legislative enactments follows constitutional role legislatures play expressing policy democratic society legislatures courts constituted respond consequently moral values people gregg georgia joint opinion stewart powell stevens jj quoting furman georgia burger dissenting specifications punishments peculiarly questions legislative policy gore cases cautioned using aegis cruel unusual punishment cut normal democratic processes gregg supra quoting powell texas plurality opinion opinions also recognized data concerning actions sentencing juries though entitled less weight legislative judgments significant reliable index contemporary values coker georgia plurality opinion quoting gregg supra jury intimate involvement case function maintain ing link contemporary community values penal system gregg supra quoting witherspoon illinois coker supra example credited data showing least juries georgia impose death sentence rape convictions enmund florida evidence current legislative judgment compelling coker persuaded overwhelming evidence american juries repudiated imposition death penalty defendant neither took life attempted intended take life view two sources work product legislatures sentencing jury determinations sole indicators courts ascertain contemporary american conceptions decency purposes eighth amendment objective indicia contemporary values firmly supported precedents importantly however reconciled undeniable precepts democratic branches government individual sentencing juries design better suited courts evaluating giving effect complex societal moral considerations inform selection publicly acceptable criminal punishments reaching conclusion today take notice fact neither petitioner amici adduced comprehensive statistics conclusively prove disprove whether juries routinely consider death disproportionate punishment mentally retarded offenders like petitioner instead adverts fact countries disapproved imposition death penalty crimes committed mentally retarded offenders see ante citing brief european union amicus curiae mccarver north carolina fail see however views countries regarding punishment citizens provide support ultimate determination true prior opinions looked climate international opinion coker supra reinforce conclusion regarding evolving standards decency see thompson oklahoma plurality opinion enmund supra trop dulles plurality opinion since explicitly rejected idea sentencing practices countries serve establish first eighth amendment prerequisite practice accepted among people stanford supra emphasizing american conceptions decency dispositive emphasis original stanford reasoning makes perfectly good sense offers basis question evidence national consensus looking viewpoints countries simply relevant nothing thompson enmund coker trop suggests otherwise thompson enmund coker rely bare citation international laws trop plurality authority deem countries sentencing choices germane trop plurality representing view minority offered explanation citation reason resurrect view given sound rejection argument stanford buttress appraisal contemporary societal values marshals public opinion poll results evidence several professional organizations religious groups adopted official positions opposing imposition death penalty upon mentally retarded offenders see ante citing brief american psychological association et al amici curiae brief american association mental retardation et al amici curiae noting representatives widely diverse religious communities reflecting christian jewish muslim buddhist traditions share conviction execution persons mental retardation morally stating polling data shows widespread consensus among americans executing mentally retarded wrong view none accorded weight eight amendment scale elected representatives state populace deemed persuasive enough prompt legislative action penry cited similar data declined take consideration public sentiment expressed yet find expression state law see also stanford plurality opinion refusing invitation rest constitutional law upon uncertain foundations public opinion polls views interest groups positions adopted various professional organizations rely data today serves illustrate willingness proscribe judicial fiat behest private organizations speaking punishment consensus developed workings normal democratic processes laboratories even accept legitimacy decision reach beyond product legislatures practices sentencing juries discern national standard decency take issue credence accords opinion polls brought attention extensive body social science literature describes methodological errors affect reliability validity estimates opinions attitudes population derived various sampling techniques everything variations survey methodology choice target population sampling design used questions asked statistical analyses used interpret data skew results see groves survey errors survey costs turner martin surveying subjective phenomena federal judicial center reference manual scientific evidence manual complex litigation pp ed offer helpful suggestions judges called upon assess weight admissibility survey evidence factual issue looking polling data reproduced appendix opinion light factors one help observe unlikely data support valid inference question presented case example questions reported asked various polls appear designed gauge whether respondents might find death penalty acceptable punishment mentally retarded offenders rare cases categorical think persons convicted murder mentally retarded receive death penalty elicit whether respondent might agree disagree mentally retarded people definition never act level culpability associated death penalty regardless severity impairment individual circumstances crime second none polls cited disclose targeted survey population sampling techniques used conducted research thus even one accepts survey instruments adequately designed address relevant question impossible know whether sample representative enough methodology sufficiently sound tell us anything opinions citizens particular state american public large finally information provided us indicate particular survey conducted cases factors also bear objectivity results order credited surveys offered evidence trial sponsors examined matters strong reasons limiting inquiry constitutes evolving standard decency eighth amendment laws passed legislatures practices sentencing juries america goes beyond objective indicators contemporary values finds support conclusion national consensus developed imposing death penalty mentally retarded defendants international opinion views professional religious organizations opinion polls demonstrated reliable ante believing view seriously mistaken dissent appendix opinion rehnquist poll survey results reported brief american association mental retardation et al amici curiae mccarver north carolina cited ante state poll date response question ar arkansans opinion death penalty opinion research associates july john dipippa fairchild death violate constitution simply morality arkansas forum never appropriate appropriate opposed executions undecided people say nothing wrong executing person mentally retarded others say death penalty never imposed person mentally retarded positions comes closest az behavior research center survey july oppose favor depends persons convicted murder favor oppose use death penalty defendant mentally retarded ca field research california death penalty survey frank hill death penalty retarded san diego mar right right opinion people feel nothing wrong imposing death penalty persons mentally retarded depending circumstances others feel death penalty never imposed persons mentally retarded circumstance death penalty mentally retarded person ca field research california death penalty survey paul van slambrouck execution convict mental state christian science monitor apr disagree agree opinion mentally retarded defendants given death penalty commit capital crimes ct quinnipac university polling institute death penalty survey april yes know think persons convicted murder mentally retarded receive death penalty fl amnesty international martin dyckman death penalty high price petersburg times apr opposed provided ga georgia state university tracy thompson executions retarded opposed atlanta journal opposed favor depends provided la marketing research loyola death penalty survey yes uncertain vote death penalty convicted person mentally retarded la louisiana poll poll apr yes opinion wo say believe mentally retarded people convicted capital murder executed md survey research center university maryland opposed favor favor oppose death penalty person convicted murder mentally retarded mo missouri mental retardation death penalty survey right right know people feel nothing wrong imposing death penalty persons mentally retarded depending circumstances others feel death penalty never imposed persons mentally retarded circumstances think right impose death penalty mentally retarded person charlotte news poll diane suchetka carolinas join emotional debate executing mentally retarded charlotte observer yes sure carolinas ban execution people mental retardation nm research polling use death penalty public opinion poll oppose support depends know support death penalty asked support following support use death penalty convicted person mentally retarded ny patrick caddell enterprises ny public opinion poll death penalty executive summary may ronald tabak mark lane execution injustice cost analysis death penalty loy rev oppose favor know like imagine member jury jury found defendant guilty murder beyond reasonable doubt needs decide sentencing last juror decide decision determine whether offender receive death penalty favor oppose sentencing offender death penalty convicted person mentally retarded ok survey oklahoma attitudes regarding capital punishment survey conducted oklahoma indigent defense system july executed executed depends people think persons convicted murder mentally retarded mental age years executed people think retarded persons subject death penalty like anyone else closer way feel retarded persons executed retarded persons subject death penalty like everyone else tx austin american statesman november opposed provided tx sam houston state university college criminal justice texas crime poll domingo ramirez jr murder trial may hinge defendant iq fort worth likely oppose following items found affect people attitude death penalty please state likely favor likely oppose death penalty matter murderer severely mentally retarded tx texas poll death penalty mar dan parker texans support death penalty corpus christi mar yes answer state use death penalty inmate considered mentally retarded tx houston chronicle stephen brewer mike tolson deadly distinction part iii debate fervent mental cases johnny paul penry illustrates lingering capital conundrum houston chronicle support support answer support death penalty convinced defendant guilty defendant mentally impaired us harris poll unfinished agenda race saundra torry high hear case retarded slayer washington post executed executed depends people think persons convicted murder mental age less retarded executed people think retarded persons subject death penalty like everyone else closer way feel retarded persons executed retarded persons subject death penalty like everyone else us yankelovich clancy shulman poll july samuel gross second thoughts americans views death penalty turn century capital punishment american future oppose favor sure favor oppose death penalty mentally retarded individuals convicted serious crimes murder us tarrance group death penalty poll mar samuel gross update american public opinion death getting personal cornell rev right right unsure people feel nothing wrong imposing death penalty persons mentally retarded depending circumstances others feel death penalty never imposed persons mentally retarded circumstances views comes closest us public policy research crime america july likely oppose likely favor matter item please tell likely favor death penalty likely oppose death penalty matter true murderer severely mentally retarded us princeton research newsweek poll samuel gross update american public opinion death getting personal cornell rev oppose favor know refused convicted person mentally retarded favor oppose death penalty us peter hart research associates innocence survey favor oppose sure proposal read please tell whether strongly favor somewhat favor mixed neutral feelings somewhat oppose strongly oppose proposal death penalty defendants mentally retarded us peter hart research associates innocence survey less difference sure much less likely somewhat less likely suppose jury defendant convicted murder time determine sentence knew defendant mentally retarded otherwise mentally impaired serious way much less likely support use death penalty specific case somewhat less likely make difference us houston chronicle stephen brewer mike tolson deadly distinction part iii debate fervent mental cases johnny paul penry illustrates lingering capital conundrum houston chronicle support support answer support death penalty convinced defendant guilty defendant mentally impaired daryl renard atkins petitioner virginia writ certiorari virginia june justice scalia chief justice justice thomas join dissenting today decision pinnacle eighth amendment jurisprudence like jurisprudence find support text history eighth amendment even support current social attitudes regarding conditions render otherwise death penalty propriate seldom opinion rested obviously upon nothing personal views members begin brief restatement facts abridged important understanding case spending day drinking alcohol smoking marijuana petitioner daryl renard atkins partner crime drove convenience store intending rob customer victim eric nesbitt airman langley air force base abducted drove nearby automated teller machine forced withdraw drove deserted area ignoring pleas leave unharmed according whose testimony jury evidently credited atkins ordered nesbitt vehicle taken steps shot one two three four five six seven eight times thorax chest abdomen arms legs jury convicted atkins capital murder resentencing virginia affirmed conviction remanded resentencing trial used improper verdict form jury heard extensive evidence petitioner alleged mental retardation psychologist testified petitioner mildly mentally retarded iq slow learne app showed lack success pretty much every domain life impaired capacity appreciate criminality conduct conform conduct law petitioner family members offered additional evidence support mental retardation claim petitioner follower state contested evidence retardation presented testimony psychologist found absolutely evidence iq score indicating petitioner least bit mentally retarded concluded petitioner average intelligence least jury also heard testimony petitioner prior felony convictions robbery attempted robbery abduction use firearm maiming victims offenses provided graphic depictions petitioner violent tendencies hit one head beer bottle slapped gun across another victim face clubbed head knocked ground helped shoot stomach jury sentenced petitioner death virginia affirmed petitioner sentence ii foregoing history demonstrates petitioner mental retardation central issue sentencing jury concluded however alleged retardation compelling reason exempt death penalty light brutality crime long demonstrated propensity violence upsetting particularized judgment basis constitutional absolute concludes one even slightly mentally retarded sufficient moral responsibility subjected capital punishment crime sociological moral conclusion implausible doubly implausible pretation constitution son oklahoma scalia dissenting eighth amendment jurisprudence punishment cruel unusual falls within one two categories modes acts punishment considered cruel unusual time bill rights adopted ford wainwright modes punishment inconsistent modern standards decency evinced objective indicia important legislation enacted country legislatures penry lynaugh makes pretense execution mildly mentally retarded considered cruel unusual severely profoundly mentally retarded commonly known idiots enjoyed special status law time like lunatics suffered deficiency rendering unable tell right wrong blackstone commentaries laws england hereinafter blackstone see also penry term idiot generally used describe persons total lack reason understanding inability distinguish good evil citing sources indicating idiots generally iq place within profound severe range mental retardation modern standards natura brevium ed originally published idiot person account number twenty pence tell father mother old may appear hath understanding reason shall profit loss due incompetence idiots excuse guilt course punishment criminal action committed deprivation senses blackstone see also penry supra instead often committed civil confinement made wards state thereby preventing go ing loose terror king subjects blackstone see also brakel parry weiner mentally disabled law ed blackstone hale pleas crown ed mentally retarded offenders less severe impairments idiots suffered criminal prosecution punishment including capital punishment see ray medical jurisprudence insanity overholser ed recounting trial execution concord new hampshire apparent imbecile imbecility less severe form retardation differs idiocy circumstance idiot utter destitution every thing like reason imbeciles possess intellectual capacity though infinitely less possessed great mass mankind highmore law idiocy lunacy great difficulty cases determine person shall said far deprived sense memory actions imputed notwithstanding defects kind still appears much reason understanding make accountable actions left argue therefore execution mildly retarded inconsistent evolving standards decency mark progress maturing society trop dulles plurality opinion warren today opinions consistently emphasized eighth amendment judgments regarding existence social standards informed objective factors maximum possible extent appear merely subjective views individual justices coker georgia plurality opinion see also stanford supra mccleskey kemp enmund florida first among objective factors statutes passed society elected representatives stanford kentucky rarely ever case members better sense evolution views american people elected representatives thompson supra scalia dissenting pays lipservice precedents miraculously extracts national consensus forbidding execution mentally retarded ante fact less half permit capital punishment issue exists recently enacted legislation barring execution mentally retarded even figure distorted one one say today executions mentally retarded morally repugnant violate national standards decency surely consensus points must one set righteous face executions seven death penalty jurisdictions legislation scope eleven counts enacted statutes prohibiting execution mentally retarded defendants convicted convicted crimes committed effective date legislation already death row consigned statute effective date even using date crime criterion retroactivity tried future murders committed many years ago put death statement absolute moral repugnance one current preference two tolerable approaches two permit execution mentally retarded situations well kansas apparently permits execution except severely mentally retarded new york permits cution mentally retarded commit murder correctional facility crim proc law mckinney penal law mckinney let us accept sake argument faulty count bare number alone enough convince reasonable person national consensus exists possible agreement among death penalty jurisdictions amounts consensus prior cases generally required much higher degree agreement finding punishment cruel unusual evolving standards grounds coker supra proscribed death penalty rape adult woman finding one jurisdiction georgia authorized punishment enmund supra invalidated death penalty mere participation robbery accomplice took life punishment permitted death penalty ford invalidated life sentence without parole recidivist statute criminal treated severely state calls evidence consensus present case fudged closely resembles evidence found inadequate establish consensus earlier cases tison arizona upheld state law authorizing capital punishment major participation felony reckless indifference life death penalty prohibited punishment stanford supra upheld state law permitting execution defendants committed capital crime age death penalty prohibited death offenders moreover major factor entirely disregards legislation relies still infancy oldest statutes years old five enacted last year half enacted within past eight sufficient experience laws know whether sensible long term myopic base sweeping constitutional principles upon narrow experience years coker burger dissenting see also thompson concurring judgment attempts bolster embarrassingly feeble evidence consensus following much number significant consistency direction change ante emphasis added direction possibly see change given years ago death penalty statutes included mentally retarded change except precipitate undoing done bound one direction finds significant enough overcome lack real consensus say accurate point recast following unimpressive observation state yet undone exemption mentally retarded one long whole years event reliance upon trends even much longer duration mere years perilous basis constitutional adjudication justice eloquently explained thompson michigan became first state abolish death penalty succeeding decades american continued trend towards abolition later particularly world war ii ensued steady dramatic decline executions abolished radically restricted capital punishment executions ceased completely several years beginning heard arguments constitutionality death penalty statistics might suggested practice become relic implicitly rejected new societal consensus know inference societal consensus rejecting death penalty mistaken declared existence consensus outlawed capital punishment legislatures likely able revive mistaken premise decision frozen constitutional law making difficult refute even difficult reject words demonstrate course merely peril riding trend also peril discerning consensus none thrashing evidence consensus includes reliance upon margins state legislatures enacted bans execution retarded ante presumably applying eighth amendment jurisprudence henceforth weigh many agreed many agreed much course percentage legislators voting bill significant surely number people represented legislators voting bill also significant fact legislators state population million voted bill impressive fact legislators state population million voted way population death penalty exclude mentally retarded population death penalty census bureau statistical abstract ed quite absurd looked past evolve eighth amendment consensus sort consensus adopted eighth amendment consensus sovereign form union nose count americans even less compelling possible argument ante evidence national consensus found infrequency retarded persons executed bar execution begin takes true fact quite doubtful clear execution mentally retarded uncommon even sources cited suggest see ante citing keyes edwards perske people mental retardation dying legally mental retardation updated death penalty center available http june showing executed allegedly mentally retarded offenders period see also bonner rimer executing mentally retarded even laws begin shift times reporting death row inmates retarded however execution mentally retarded uncommon sufficient explanation retarded comprise tiny fraction society brief american psychological association et al amici curiae surely explanation mental retardation constitutionally mandated mitigating factor sentencing penry reason even uniform national sentiment favor executing retarded appropriate cases one still expect execution mentally retarded uncommon adapt present case said stanford possible overwhelmingly probable considerations induce today majority believe death never imposed mentally retarded offenders cause prosecutors juries believe rarely imposed prize feeble effort fabricate national consensus must go appeal deservedly relegated views assorted professional religious organizations members world community respondents opinion polls ante agree chief ante dissenting opinion views professional religious organizations results opinion polls equally irrelevant practices world community whose notions justice thankfully always people must never forget constitution america expounding first settled consensus among people views nations however enlightened justices may think imposed upon americans constitution thompson scalia dissenting iii beyond empty talk national consensus gives us brief glimpse really underlies today decision pretension power confined neither moral sentiments originally enshrined eighth amendment original meaning even current moral sentiments american constitution says contemplates end judgment brought bear question acceptability death penalty eighth amendment ante quoting coker emphasis added unexpressed reason unexpressed contemplation constitution presumably really good lawyers moral sentiments superior common herd whether today arrogance assumption power takes one breath away explains course cavalier evidence consensus game end feelings intuition majority justices count perceptions decency penology mercy entertained majority small unrepresentative segment society sits thompson supra scalia dissenting genuinely operative portion opinion statement reasons agrees contrived consensus found diminished capacities mentally retarded render death penalty excessive ante analysis rests two fundamental assumptions eighth amendment prohibits excessive punishments sentencing juries judges unable account properly diminished capacities retarded first assumption wrong explained length harmelin michigan opinion scalia eighth amendment addressed cruel punishments rack thumbscrew punishment permissible eighth amendment ratchet whereby temporary consensus leniency particular crime fixes permanent constitutional maximum disabling giving effect altered beliefs responding changed social conditions second assumption inability judges juries take proper account mental retardation unsubstantiated contradicts immemorial belief england play indispensable role matters difficult define indivisible line divides perfect partial insanity must rest upon circumstances duly weighed considered judge jury lest one side kind inhumanity towards defects human nature side great indulgence given great crimes hale pleas crown proceeding faulty assumptions gives two reasons death penalty excessive punishment mentally retarded offenders first diminished capacities mentally retarded raise serious question whether execution contributes social purposes death penalty retribution deterrence ante conveniently ignores third social purpose death penalty incapacitation dangerous criminals consequent prevention crimes may otherwise commit future gregg georgia joint opinion stewart powell stevens never mind discussion even two bear analysis retribution advanced argument goes mentally retarded culpable average murderer already held lacks sufficient culpability warrant death penalty see godfrey georgia plurality opinion ante says established correlation mental acuity ability conform one conduct law rudimentary matter murder mentally retarded really disposed hence likely commit willfully cruel serious crime others experience opposite true childlike generally suggests innocence rather brutality assuming however direct connection diminished intelligence inability refrain murder scientific analysis possibly show mildly retarded individual commits exquisite culpable average murderer domestic dispute moderately retarded individual commits series exquisite surely culpability deservedness severe retribution depends merely upon mental capacity criminal level able distinguish right wrong also upon depravity crime precisely sort question traditionally thought answerable categorical rule sort today imposes upon trials rather sentencer weighing circumstances degree retardation depravity crime particular case fact juries continue sentence mentally retarded offenders death extreme crimes shows society moral outrage sometimes demands execution retarded offenders principle law science logic pronounce wrong none admits mental retardation render offender morally blameless ante basis saying death penalty never appropriate bution matter heinous crime long mentally retarded offender knows difference right wrong ante sentencer assess whether retardation reduces culpability enough exempt death penalty particular murder question social purpose death penalty discusses deterrence advanced tells us mentally retarded less likely counterparts process information possibility execution penalty control conduct based upon information ante course leads conclusion discussed earlier mentally retarded less deterred likely kill neither society large believes event even say mentally retarded individuals process information possibility execution penalty control conduct based upon information merely asserts less likely able surely deterrent effect penalty adequately vindicated successfully deters many target class virginia death penalty example fail deterrent effect simply criminals unaware virginia death penalty words supposed fact retarded criminals fully appreciate death penalty nothing deterrence rationale simply echo arguments denying retribution rationale discussed rejected sure murderer somehow less blameworthy though knew act wrong fully appreciate die treat mentally retarded murderer way treat offender may less likely respond death penalty abused child hold immune capital punishment require background considered sentencer mitigating factor eddings oklahoma throws one last factor grab bag reasons execution retarded excessive cases mentally retarded offenders face special risk wrongful execution less able make persuasive showing mitigation give meaningful assistance counsel effective witnesses ante special risk pretty flabby language even flabbier less likely suppose similar special risk said exist plain stupid people inarticulate people even ugly people unsupported claim substance doubt might support due process claim criminal prosecutions mentally retarded hard see anything eighth amendment claim execution mentally retarded cruel unusual never held cruel unusual punishment impose sentence violation constitutional imperative today opinion adds one long list substantive procedural requirements impeding imposition death penalty imposed assumed power invent jurisprudence none requirements existed eighth amendment adopted even supported current moral consensus include prohibition death penalty ordinary murder godfrey plurality opinion sumner shuman requirement sentencer given unguided discretion furman georgia per curiam requirement sentencer empowered take account mitigating circumstances lockett ohio plurality opinion eddings oklahoma supra requirement accused receive judicial evaluation claim insanity sentence executed ford plurality opinion something said popular abolition death penalty nothing said incremental abolition newest invention promises effective others turning process capital trial game one need read definitions mental retardation adopted american association mental retardation american psychiatric association set forth opinion ante realize symptoms condition readily feigned whereas capital defendant feigns insanity risks commitment mental institution cured tried executed jones capital defendant feigns mental retardation risks nothing mere pendency present case brought us petitions death row inmates claiming first time multiple habeas petitions retarded see moore texas scalia dissenting grant applications stay execution perhaps practical difficulties experienced minority recently changed mental retardation mitigating factor accepted rejected sentencer absolute immunity time tell brief time new disposition place average years surely enough practical difficulties appear share perceived moral consensus mental retardation renders death penalty inappropriate crimes majority presumably follow suit justification pushing experiment turning experiment permanent practice constitutional pretext nothing changed accuracy matthew hale endorsement common law traditional method taking account factors written three centuries ago determination person incapacity matter great difficulty partly easiness counterfeiting disability partly variety degrees infirmity whereof sufficient insufficient excuse persons capital offenses yet law england hath afforded best method trial possible matters fact namely jury twelve men concurring judgment testimony witnesses inspection direction judge hale pleas crown respectfully dissent footnotes initially jones atkins indicted capital murder prosecution ultimately permitted jones plead guilty murder exchange testimony atkins result plea jones became ineligible receive death penalty highly damaging credibility atkins testimony substantial inconsistency statement gave police upon arrest jones contrast declined make initial statement authorities american association mental retardation aamr defines mental retardation follows mental retardation refers substantial limitations present functioning characterized significantly subaverage intellectual functioning existing concurrently related limitations two following applicable adaptive skill areas communication home living social skills community use health safety functional academics leisure work mental retardation manifests age mental retardation definition classification systems supports ed american psychiatric association definition similar essential feature mental retardation significantly subaverage general intellectual functioning criterion accompanied significant limitations adaptive functioning least two following skill areas communication home living skills use community resources functional academic skills work leisure health safety criterion onset must occur age years criterion mental retardation many different etiologies may seen final common pathway various pathological processes affect functioning central nervous system american psychiatric association diagnostic statistical manual mental disorders ed mild mental retardation typically used describe people iq level approximately doctor interviewed atkins members family deputies jail incarcerated preceding months nelson also reviewed statements atkins given police investigative reports concerning case nelson administered wechsler adult intelligence scales test standard instrument assessing intellectual functioning aamr mental retardation supra scored adding together number points earned different subtests using mathematical formula convert raw score scaled score test measures intelligence range mean score test means person receiving score considered average level cognitive functioning kaufman lichtenberger essentials iii assessment estimated percent population iq lower typically considered cutoff iq score intellectual function prong mental retardation definition sadock sadock comprehensive textbook psychiatry ed sentencing phase nelson testified atkins full scale iq compared population large means less one percentile mental retardation relatively rare thing one percent population app according nelson atkins iq score automatically qualify social security disability income nelson also indicated capital defendants evaluated atkins second individual met criteria mental retardation testified opinion atkins limited intellect consistent feature throughout life iq score aberration malingered result invalid test score samenow testimony based upon two interviews atkins review school records interviews correctional staff administer intelligence test ask atkins questions taken version wechsler memory scale samenow attributed atkins academic performance large terrible fact person chose pay attention sometimes pay attention others poorly want required thus read text amendment prohibit excessive punishments well cruel unusual punishments may may excessive jerome bowden identified mental retardation scheduled imminent execution georgia june georgia board pardons paroles granted stay following public protests execution psychologist selected state evaluated bowden determined iq consistent mental retardation nevertheless board lifted stay bowden executed following day board concluded bowden understood nature crime punishment therefore execution despite mental deficiencies permissible see montgomery bowden execution stirs protest atlanta journal code ann supp abuse act pub stat congress expanded federal death penalty law included provision prohibited individual mental retardation sentenced death executed federal death penalty act md ann code art rev stat ann code ann stat ann ark code ann rev stat ann rev code ind code stat ann crim proc law however new york law provides sentence death may set aside upon ground defendant mentally retarded killing occurred defendant confined custody state correctional facility local correctional institution crim proc law mckinney interim pocket part neb rev stat codified laws rev stat ann stat stat ann mo rev stat sess laws house bill passed texas house april senate version passed texas senate may governor perry vetoed legislation june veto statement texas governor express dissatisfaction principle categorically excluding mentally retarded death penalty fact stated execute mentally retarded murderers today see veto proclamation instead motivation veto bill based upon perceived procedural flaw opposition legislation focuses serious legal flaw bill house bill create system whereby jury judge asked make determination based two different sets facts also grave concern fact provision sets legally flawed process never received public hearing legislative process ibid virginia senate bill house bill see also nevada assembly bill furthermore commission capital punishment illinois recently recommended illinois adopt statute prohibiting execution mentally retarded offenders report governor commission capital punishment april comparison stanford kentucky held national consensus prohibiting execution juvenile offenders age telling although decided stanford day penry apparently two state legislatures raised threshold age imposition death penalty mont code ann ind code app brief aamr et al amici curiae alabama texas louisiana south carolina virginia keyes edwards perske people mental retardation dying legally mental retardation updated death penalty information center available http june additional evidence makes clear legislative judgment reflects much broader social professional consensus example several organizations germane expertise adopted official positions opposing imposition death penalty upon mentally retarded offender see brief american psychological association et al amici curiae brief aamr et al amici curiae addition representatives widely diverse religious communities reflecting christian jewish muslim buddhist traditions filed amicus curiae brief explaining even though views death penalty differ share conviction execution persons mental retardation morally justified see brief catholic conference et al amici curiae mccarver north carolina moreover within world community imposition death penalty crimes committed mentally retarded offenders overwhelmingly disapproved brief european union amicus curiae mccarver north carolina finally polling data shows widespread consensus among americans even support death penalty executing mentally retarded wrong bonner rimer executing mentally retarded even laws begin shift times app brief aamr amicus curiae mccarver north carolina appending approximately state national polls issue although factors means dispositive consistency legislative evidence lends support conclusion consensus among addressed issue see thompson oklahoma considering views respected professional organizations nations share heritage leading members western european community statutory definitions mental retardation identical generally conform clinical definitions set forth supra mcgee menolascino evaluation defendants mental retardation criminal justice system criminal justice system mental retardation conley luckasson bouthilet eds appelbaum appelbaum related competencies defendants mental retardation psychiatry winter see ellis luckasson mentally retarded criminal defendants geo rev kedem sevillia ego identity mentally retarded adolescents mental retardation whitman self regulation mental retardation mental retardation everington fulero competence confess measuring understanding suggestibility defendants mental retardation mental retardation hereinafter everington fulero see everington fulero despite heavy burden prosecution must shoulder capital cases ignore fact recent years disturbing number inmates death row exonerated two recent cases demonstrate exonerations include mentally retarded persons unwittingly confessed crimes commit see baker inmate gets clemency agreement ends days suspense washington post holt mcroberts porter fully savors first taste freedom judge releases man set execution chicago tribune footnotes apparently statistics exist see brief american association mental retardation et al amici curiae mccarver north carolina noting actions individual prosecutors juries difficult quantify precision petitioner inability muster studies favor cut heavy burden stanford kentucky internal quotation marks omitted establish national consensus punishment deemed acceptable virginia legislature jury sentenced furthermore worth noting experts estimated many percent death row inmates mentally retarded see bonner rimer executing mentally retarded even laws begin shift times number suggests sentencing juries reluctant impose death penalty defendants like petitioner case coker georgia enmund florida footnotes see rev stat ann supp ark code ann reams state ark stat supp code ann ind code rondon state ind stat ann rev stat ann md ann code art booth state md mo rev stat supp crim proc law mckinney supp sess laws ch code ann van tran state kansas statute defines mentally retarded significantly subaverage general intellectual functioning extent substantially impairs one capacity appreciate criminality one conduct conform one conduct requirements law stat ann definition retardation petitioner concedes analogous model penal code definition mental disease defect excusing responsibility criminal conduct see ali model penal code include mild mental retardation reply brief petitioner code ann rev stat ann stat stat ann mo rev stat stat addition statutes cited supra see codified laws enacted neb rev stat crim proc law ind code stat ann cases positively cites example views catholic conference whose members active catholic bishops see ante citing brief catholic conference et al amici curiae mccarver north carolina attitudes body regarding crime punishment far representative even views catholics currently object intense national entirely ecumenical criticism