Atkins v. Virginia Peter Diddy Period 6 Constitutional Law

Facts of the Case A man was convicted of armed robbery, capital murder, and abduction. Daryl Atkins was given the death penalty. His defense argued he was mentally retarded. The Supreme Court of Virginia agreed that it was legal to execute Atkins and he was sentenced to death. An earlier case, Penry v. Lynaugh, it was decided that a mentally retarded person cold not be executed.

Constitutional Question Is the execution of mentally retarded persons “cruel and unusual punishment” prohibited by the Eight Amendment?

Supreme Court Decision Court answered yes, 6 to 3, that the execution of mentally retarded. The court argued that execution of the mentally retarded violated the 8 th Amendment. Many states do not execute these types of criminals, so the court believed that was important to take this into consideration. Also, they felt that executing them “evolving standards of decency” must be included in a decision. They felt it excessive for a state to take the life of a mentally retarded offender. Therefore, it is cruel and unusual to do so under the 8 th Amendment.

Reflection I agree with the courts decision. I believe that the 8 th Amendment “cruel and unusual” clause should apply to all people who do not have all their mental faculties. The same would apply to a minor or those who have psychiatric problems. The death penalty is not a game and should not be given out for all people the same way in these cases. The 8 th Amendment is in place to protect us from government abuse of power when it comes to dishing out punishment to offenders.