Encyclopedia of Psychology and Law

this finding. Despite the finality of the Supreme Court

ruling, controversy and ethical dilemmas remain.

Monica K. Miller, Jared Chamberlain,

and Jose H. Vargas

See alsoDeath Penalty; Juveniles and the Death Penalty;

Mental Retardation and the Death Penalty; Racial Bias

and the Death Penalty; Religion and the Death Penalty

Further Readings

Boots, D. P., Cochran, J. K., & Heide, K. M. (2003). Capital

punishment preferences for special offender populations.

Journal of Criminal Justice, 31,553–565.

Boots, D. P., Heide, K. M., & Cochran, J. K. (2004). Death

penalty support for special offender populations of legally

convicted murderers: Juvenile, the mentally retarded and

the mentally incompetent. Behavioral Sciences and the

Law, 22,223–238.

Ford v. Wainwright,477 U.S. 399 (1986).

Slobogin, C. (2000). Mental illness and the death penalty

[Electronic version]. California Criminal Law Review, 2,

Article No. 3.

Trop v. Dulles,356 U.S. 86 (1958).

MENTAL RETARDATION

AND THE DEATHPENALTY

The execution of mentally retarded prisoners has

been a controversial topic for decades. The U.S.

Supreme Court has found, in Atkins v. Virginia

(2002), that such executions are unconstitutional; this

decision was partially based on the community’s

evolving standards of decency. The legal system

requires mental health professionals to determine

whether a prisoner is mentally retarded, which is a

difficult and controversial task.

In 1989, the Supreme Court in Penry v. Lynaugh

had determined that the mentally retarded, as a class,

should not be protected from receiving the death

penalty. Instead, defendants’ mental status should be

considered on a case-by-case basis, with individual

factors determining whether each defendant is eligible

for the death penalty. The Court found that individu-

als with mental retardation vary greatly in their capac-

ity and culpability; thus, a blanket exclusion was not

appropriate. After the Penry decision, many states

enacted new statutes or adapted their existing death

penalty statutes to exempt the mentally retarded.

In 2002, the Supreme Court reversed itself in

Atkins v. Virginia.The Court determined that the exe-

cution of mentally retarded prisoners was a violation

of the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of cruel and

unusual punishment. They relied heavily on evidence

that the majority of states’ statutes forbid the execu-

tion of the mentally retarded. Even those states that

still permitted such executions had not carried out an

execution of a mentally retarded prisoner in the pre-

ceding years.

In addition, the Atkins court found it significant

that the execution of the mentally retarded was

opposed by professional organizations, including

the American Psychological Association and the

American Association on Mental Retardation (AAMR).

The AAMR’s amicus brief presented the results of 27

opinion polls; results of these polls varied but revealed

that 56% to 84% of respondents indicated disfavor

with the executions of the mentally retarded. No poll

found more than 32% support for execution, no

matter how the question was worded. This accumula-

tion of data indicated that the execution of men-

tally retarded prisoners violated the community’s

“evolving standards of decency” as set forth in Trop v.

Dulles(1958).

Since the Atkinsdecision, state courts have strug-

gled with defining mental retardation and determining

what burden of proof (e.g., clear and convincing evi-

dence) is needed to prove that a defendant is mentally

retarded. Courts have also disagreed on whether the

burden of proving mental retardation should fall on

the defendant or the state.

Psychologists and researchers have two main roles

associated with the execution of the mentally retarded.

First, social science researchers have conducted pub-

lic opinion polls concerning the execution of mentally

retarded prisoners. Second, mental health profession-

als regularly conduct evaluations to determine a

defendant’s level of mental retardation.

Public Opinion Research

The Atkinscourt found that public opinion opposed

executing the mentally retarded. Psychologists con-

firmed this conclusion both before and after the pun-

ishment was determined to be unconstitutional. In the

years after the Penrydecision many polls were con-

ducted, with most finding that the level of support for

498 ———Mental Retardation and the Death Penalty

M-Cutler (Encyc)-45463.qxd 11/18/2007 12:43 PM Page 498