Wednesday, July 1, 2015

Evidence of mental disability allowed to develop claim of cruel and unusual punishment.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled prisoners sentenced to death before Adkins v. Virginia may admit evidence of low IQ and mental health history to develop a claim that the death penalty is cruel and unusual.
 
 
      
       Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002), held that executing mentally disabled inmates violates  "evolving standards of decency" under the Eighth Amendment. Kevan Brumfield was sentenced to death before the Atkins case was determined. The Supreme Court ruled that he must be allowed to more fully develop a claim that he is too intellectually disabled to be put to death.
 
      Regardless of the deferential standards set out in the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, Brumfield is entitled to federal habeas review because the state court's refusal to give him at least a hearing was "contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law."
 
     Inmates sentenced to death since Atkins are already protected in this way, but this opinion clarifies that even inmates sentenced before must be allowed a chance to make a case (if they had not already had a chance) that they have a mental disability. It also establishes that a person who suffers from an intellectual disability (such as an IQ below 75) are protected, not just people who are proven mentally ill or insane.
 

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.