Atkins V Virginia

1 Criminal Justice 222 23 June 2012 The homage fount Atkins vs. Virginia is discussing the let go that ment whollyy mentally retard people cosmos rewarded the death penalty. The watchword is that, are they capable of knowing the contrariety between redress and wrong? When people are retarded does it affect their ethical motive and the way they look at situations? Does it affect the decisions they make and does it bushel the control they have on their emotions? Are their impulses clouded? Or could it be that people achievement as mental retards near to get slack? This court cuticle was a major(ip) move in figuring push through the decision in these type of cases dealing with mentally retarded people. This June 20th , 2002 case was a landmark decision by the US overbearing Court in reversing a source statute s founded in the case of Penry v. Lynaugh in 1889. The issue of the exercise of mentally challenged individuals was first address in the case of Penry v Lynaugh in 1889. In a 5-4 decision the Supreme Court command that the execution of mentally challenged individuals is not a violation of the one-eighth Amendment. The APA found that there were two principle reasons that led to this decision.

(1) the disabilities that result mental deceleration are directly relevant to the unlawful responsibility and select of punishment, and (2) the degree of reduction in chaste blameworthiness act by a defendant s mental slowing renders imposition of the ! death penalty unconstitutional (www.deathpenaltyinfo.org ) Even though Georgia and Massachusetts banned the execution of the mentally challenged at the time, the court found that not full states had formed a national consensus on the matter. Exactly how did all this come or so? What Cates 2 led up to this Supreme Court landmark retroversion? Approximately midnight in August 16, 1996, Atkins and...If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: OrderCustomPaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper