Posted: Mon Oct 17th, 2005 12:28 pm
Supreme Court rules against Arizona death row inmate
By Gina Holland
ASSOCIATED PRESS
7:35 a.m. October 17, 2005
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court said Monday that
death row inmates do not automatically have a right to
a jury trial to determine whether they are mentally
retarded, and therefore ineligible for execution.
Three years ago the court barred executions of the
mentally retarded, on grounds that they violated the
constitutional ban on cruel and unusual punishment.
Justices left it up to states to determine whether
inmates are retarded.
In an unsigned opinion on Monday, justices reiterated
that states have discretion to set up their own
systems. The court issued its opinion without hearing
arguments.
The decision leaves open the chance for a future court
challenge, claiming that a system as applied is
unconstitutional.
The ruling overturned an appeals court ruling that
said an Arizona death row inmate, Robert Smith, was
entitled to a jury trial on his claims that he is
mentally retarded. Smith is on death row for the 1980
murder of a mentally ill woman who had asked him for a
ride to the food stamp office in Tucson, Ariz. The
woman was raped, choked, stabbed and beaten with a
rock.
"There is no constitutional basis for requiring a
jury, rather than a judge, to determine whether a
defendant is mentally retarded," justices were told by
Arizona state attorney Kent Cattani.
Smith's attorney, S. Jonathan Young, said that because
the mental retardation finding would affect Smith's
sentence, it should be resolved by a jury.
The Supreme Court said that "Arizona had not even had
a chance to apply its chosen procedures when the 9th
Circuit preemptively imposed its jury trial
condition."
Fifteen states had urged the Supreme Court to rule in
Arizona's favor: California, Connecticut, Delaware,
Idaho, Illinois, Kentucky, Mississippi, Nevada, New
Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee,
Texas and Utah.
In a filing with justices, lawyers for those states
said that the process for determining if someone is
mentally retarded varies state-by-state.
The 2002 case that led to the mental retardation
ruling involved Virginia death row inmate Daryl
Atkins. A jury determined this summer that Atkins was
mentally competent and could be put to death for the
robbery and slaying of an Air Force enlisted man over
beer money.
The case is Schriro v. Smith, 04-1475.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nati ... arded.html
