LV426
02-17-2004, 01:56 AM
Courts consider Texas death row retardation claims (http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/02/16/deathrow.retardation/index.html)
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) -- In the year and a half since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled mentally retarded inmates cannot be executed, more than 40 death row cases were delayed or sent back for review in Texas -- leaving appellate courts in a quandary.
Death penalty supporters wonder if inmates are trying to delay justice by jamming the courts with new claims of mental retardation. Meanwhile, critics of the state's capital punishment system say the numbers point to dozens of people who may be ineligible for execution.
Both sides agree, however, that the state Legislature should change Texas law to decide mental retardation earlier in death row cases, reducing the burden on federal and state appeals courts.
"Texas has no system in place, and what you have is chaos," said Steve Hall, director of StandDown Texas, which opposes the death penalty.
The high court's ruling in June 2002 protected the severely mentally retarded, and most states have followed nationally accepted guidelines that define retardation as significantly below-average intellect combined with low "adaptive" skills at such things as communicating and taking care of oneself.
But when drawing the line between inmates with low intelligence and those who are retarded, states have disagreed, making it easier to get off death row in some states and harder in others.
Lawmakers in Texas tried to address the issue last year but couldn't agree on whether retardation should be determined before or after the guilty phase of a trial.
According to the Texas Defender Service, the state Court of Criminal Appeals has sent 37 cases back to trial courts for hearings. Four cases were remanded by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans.
Most cases sent back to lower courts have yet to be completed, said Jim Marcus, executive director of the Texas Defender Service.
Death row inmate Johnny Paul Penry's case was one of the state's most high-profile mental retardation claims.
Convicted of killing a woman in 1979 and sentenced to die, Penry remains on death row after being sentenced to death three times.
The U.S. Supreme court had overturned his conviction because evidence of mental retardation wasn't considered in trial court. Penry was tried again, and the death sentence was thrown out in 2001. But, the next year, a jury sentenced him to death.
Dianne Clements, president of the victims rights group Justice For All, said it's difficult not having a clear state definition of mental retardation.
"These defendants are taking every opportunity they can to remove themselves from death row," Clements said.
There are about 450 prisoners on death row in Texas, officials said.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In other news regarding the death penalty
Supreme Court will revisit execution of teenage killers (http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/01/26/scotus.death.penalty/index.html)
By Bill Mears
CNN Washington Bureau
Monday, January 26, 2004 Posted: 2:21 PM EST (1921 GMT)
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Supreme Court Monday agreed to again decide the constitutionality of executing people who were juveniles at the time they committed murder.
The justices will consider the Missouri case of Christopher Simmons, who was 17 at the time of a murder-robbery. The state Supreme Court overturned his death sentence last year, saying the execution of those under 18 violated the Constitution's ban on "cruel and unusual punishment."
Missouri officials then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court asking the law be upheld.
In accepting the Simmons case, the high court said it will reopen the question of whether executing very young killers violates the Constitution's ban on "cruel and unusual punishment." Currently, states that allow the death penalty may impose it on killers who were 16 or 17 at the time of their crimes.
The case continues a contentious debate over the death penalty -- both who belongs on death row, and how it should be carried out.
The 5-4 conservative majority on the current Court has typically upheld capital punishment, but two years ago the justices did outlaw executing the mentally retarded who are convicted of crimes that carry the death penalty. (Full story)
The four more liberal justices -- John Paul Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Stephen Breyer -- have long spoken out against the practice of executing teenage killers. In a strongly worded joint statement last year, they labeled it a "shameful practice" and a "relic of the past ... inconsistent with evolving standards of decency in a civilized society."
The issue now for the nation's high court is twofold, say legal experts: Whether public opinion on how the death penalty is carried out has changed, and whether teenage killers, in much the same way as the mentally retarded, have the capacity to fully comprehend their actions.
The Supreme Court in 1989 upheld executing those under 18 at the time of their crimes. Only the United States and a handful of other countries allow execution of juvenile killers, and death penalty opponents argue that such executions violate not only the Constitution but an international treaty signed by the United States. (Full story)
According to Victor Streib, an Ohio Northern University law professor who issues an annual report on the issue, 20 states, not including Missouri, have laws for executing juvenile killers, but the practice is declining. 14 juvenile offenders were sentenced to death in 1999, seven in 2001, four in 2002, and two last year.
Texas has executed 13 young killers since capital punishment was reinstated in 1976.
Christopher Simmons
According to the Death Penalty Information Center, there are now 82 inmates on death row nationwide for crimes committed when they were under 18, according to an Associated Press report. States have put to death 22 such inmates in recent years.
The issue gained national attention last year when Lee Boyd Malvo, convicted by a Virginia jury in one of the 2002 Washington-area sniper shootings, was spared the death penalty. He was 17 at the time of his arrest. His adult co-conspirator, John Muhammad, was sentenced to die for a separate sniper killing.
In the Missouri case, Christopher Simmons was convicted of the 1993 murder of Shirley Crook. Her body was found in the Meramec River in St. Louis County, and had been tied with electric cable, leather straps and duct tape, with bruises on her body and fractured ribs.
Simmons' family and attorneys claimed he suffered from severe mental and physical abuse from his stepfather.
Oral arguments in the will likely be heard this fall. The case is Roper v. Simmons, case no. 03-0633.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Now I am all for the death penalty and frankly I don't care if the moron that was sentenced to die hasn't got two brain cells to rub together. What is the sense in allowing retarded and mentally impaired individuals to escape the death penalty just because they are retarded and mentally impaired. In fact it would behoove society to get rid of these sub standard humans especially since they have proven that they are a menace to society. On the side of the minors I believe that it depends on the age of the minor. If someone is capablle of acknowledging and recognizing their actions and as such commit a crime that results in a murder, then that person deserves to be judged as an adult. A 17 year old man who is capable of committing a murder robbery is perfectly capable of being put to death without it being cruel and unusual punishment. Cruel and unusual is tying a man to a truck and dragging him over broken glass and sharp shards of metal. Death is not cruel unless you make it cruel. And instead of letting these people sit on death row for years, the death penalty needs to be acted upon as soon as possible.If the governor isn't capable of pardoning them and issuing a full release, then I say inject them, fry them, hang them, shoot them, whatever is neccesary to stop them from breathing my air. If you commit the crime, and get caught, then you get to pay the price.
There was this guy outside the supermarket today trying to get people to sign a petition to reject the 3 strikes bill for non felony offenses. He sits there and tells me that people who steal money or break in and steal people's things, or commit a crime and get caught not once, not twice, but three times, shouldn't have to stay in jail for life. Well I agree, why should I pay for their criminal ass to watch tv and eat three meals a day and have shelter, shoot the fuckers. Because if you can't learn with three chances that committing crimes is wrong then you are an idiot and need to be removed from the gene pool.
P.S. This should go in the Politics forum but unfortunately we don't have one... Yet! :cool:
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) -- In the year and a half since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled mentally retarded inmates cannot be executed, more than 40 death row cases were delayed or sent back for review in Texas -- leaving appellate courts in a quandary.
Death penalty supporters wonder if inmates are trying to delay justice by jamming the courts with new claims of mental retardation. Meanwhile, critics of the state's capital punishment system say the numbers point to dozens of people who may be ineligible for execution.
Both sides agree, however, that the state Legislature should change Texas law to decide mental retardation earlier in death row cases, reducing the burden on federal and state appeals courts.
"Texas has no system in place, and what you have is chaos," said Steve Hall, director of StandDown Texas, which opposes the death penalty.
The high court's ruling in June 2002 protected the severely mentally retarded, and most states have followed nationally accepted guidelines that define retardation as significantly below-average intellect combined with low "adaptive" skills at such things as communicating and taking care of oneself.
But when drawing the line between inmates with low intelligence and those who are retarded, states have disagreed, making it easier to get off death row in some states and harder in others.
Lawmakers in Texas tried to address the issue last year but couldn't agree on whether retardation should be determined before or after the guilty phase of a trial.
According to the Texas Defender Service, the state Court of Criminal Appeals has sent 37 cases back to trial courts for hearings. Four cases were remanded by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans.
Most cases sent back to lower courts have yet to be completed, said Jim Marcus, executive director of the Texas Defender Service.
Death row inmate Johnny Paul Penry's case was one of the state's most high-profile mental retardation claims.
Convicted of killing a woman in 1979 and sentenced to die, Penry remains on death row after being sentenced to death three times.
The U.S. Supreme court had overturned his conviction because evidence of mental retardation wasn't considered in trial court. Penry was tried again, and the death sentence was thrown out in 2001. But, the next year, a jury sentenced him to death.
Dianne Clements, president of the victims rights group Justice For All, said it's difficult not having a clear state definition of mental retardation.
"These defendants are taking every opportunity they can to remove themselves from death row," Clements said.
There are about 450 prisoners on death row in Texas, officials said.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In other news regarding the death penalty
Supreme Court will revisit execution of teenage killers (http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/01/26/scotus.death.penalty/index.html)
By Bill Mears
CNN Washington Bureau
Monday, January 26, 2004 Posted: 2:21 PM EST (1921 GMT)
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Supreme Court Monday agreed to again decide the constitutionality of executing people who were juveniles at the time they committed murder.
The justices will consider the Missouri case of Christopher Simmons, who was 17 at the time of a murder-robbery. The state Supreme Court overturned his death sentence last year, saying the execution of those under 18 violated the Constitution's ban on "cruel and unusual punishment."
Missouri officials then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court asking the law be upheld.
In accepting the Simmons case, the high court said it will reopen the question of whether executing very young killers violates the Constitution's ban on "cruel and unusual punishment." Currently, states that allow the death penalty may impose it on killers who were 16 or 17 at the time of their crimes.
The case continues a contentious debate over the death penalty -- both who belongs on death row, and how it should be carried out.
The 5-4 conservative majority on the current Court has typically upheld capital punishment, but two years ago the justices did outlaw executing the mentally retarded who are convicted of crimes that carry the death penalty. (Full story)
The four more liberal justices -- John Paul Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Stephen Breyer -- have long spoken out against the practice of executing teenage killers. In a strongly worded joint statement last year, they labeled it a "shameful practice" and a "relic of the past ... inconsistent with evolving standards of decency in a civilized society."
The issue now for the nation's high court is twofold, say legal experts: Whether public opinion on how the death penalty is carried out has changed, and whether teenage killers, in much the same way as the mentally retarded, have the capacity to fully comprehend their actions.
The Supreme Court in 1989 upheld executing those under 18 at the time of their crimes. Only the United States and a handful of other countries allow execution of juvenile killers, and death penalty opponents argue that such executions violate not only the Constitution but an international treaty signed by the United States. (Full story)
According to Victor Streib, an Ohio Northern University law professor who issues an annual report on the issue, 20 states, not including Missouri, have laws for executing juvenile killers, but the practice is declining. 14 juvenile offenders were sentenced to death in 1999, seven in 2001, four in 2002, and two last year.
Texas has executed 13 young killers since capital punishment was reinstated in 1976.
Christopher Simmons
According to the Death Penalty Information Center, there are now 82 inmates on death row nationwide for crimes committed when they were under 18, according to an Associated Press report. States have put to death 22 such inmates in recent years.
The issue gained national attention last year when Lee Boyd Malvo, convicted by a Virginia jury in one of the 2002 Washington-area sniper shootings, was spared the death penalty. He was 17 at the time of his arrest. His adult co-conspirator, John Muhammad, was sentenced to die for a separate sniper killing.
In the Missouri case, Christopher Simmons was convicted of the 1993 murder of Shirley Crook. Her body was found in the Meramec River in St. Louis County, and had been tied with electric cable, leather straps and duct tape, with bruises on her body and fractured ribs.
Simmons' family and attorneys claimed he suffered from severe mental and physical abuse from his stepfather.
Oral arguments in the will likely be heard this fall. The case is Roper v. Simmons, case no. 03-0633.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Now I am all for the death penalty and frankly I don't care if the moron that was sentenced to die hasn't got two brain cells to rub together. What is the sense in allowing retarded and mentally impaired individuals to escape the death penalty just because they are retarded and mentally impaired. In fact it would behoove society to get rid of these sub standard humans especially since they have proven that they are a menace to society. On the side of the minors I believe that it depends on the age of the minor. If someone is capablle of acknowledging and recognizing their actions and as such commit a crime that results in a murder, then that person deserves to be judged as an adult. A 17 year old man who is capable of committing a murder robbery is perfectly capable of being put to death without it being cruel and unusual punishment. Cruel and unusual is tying a man to a truck and dragging him over broken glass and sharp shards of metal. Death is not cruel unless you make it cruel. And instead of letting these people sit on death row for years, the death penalty needs to be acted upon as soon as possible.If the governor isn't capable of pardoning them and issuing a full release, then I say inject them, fry them, hang them, shoot them, whatever is neccesary to stop them from breathing my air. If you commit the crime, and get caught, then you get to pay the price.
There was this guy outside the supermarket today trying to get people to sign a petition to reject the 3 strikes bill for non felony offenses. He sits there and tells me that people who steal money or break in and steal people's things, or commit a crime and get caught not once, not twice, but three times, shouldn't have to stay in jail for life. Well I agree, why should I pay for their criminal ass to watch tv and eat three meals a day and have shelter, shoot the fuckers. Because if you can't learn with three chances that committing crimes is wrong then you are an idiot and need to be removed from the gene pool.
P.S. This should go in the Politics forum but unfortunately we don't have one... Yet! :cool: