CLE123, Inc.
Continuing Legal Education made as EASY as 1 2 3!
Call us at (866) 925-3123
Customer Support Available 8am-8pm EST
Courses
- Courses
- Supreme Court Argument- Atkins v. Virginia (Does the Constitution Permit States to Execute Individuals that are Mentally Retarded?)
Supreme Court Argument- Atkins v. Virginia (Does the Constitution Permit States to Execute Individuals that are Mentally Retarded?)
- Sku:
- OYZ226
- Price:
- US$50.00
- Total Time:
- 80
- Credits:
- Select State to Find Out
Course Description
Speaker: James W. Ellis (Argued the cause for the petitioner) & Pamela A. Rumpz (Argued the cause for the respondent) with an introduction by Jeffrey Gold, Esq.
Daryl Renard Atkins was convicted of abduction, armed robbery, and capital murder. In the penalty phase of Atkins' trial, the defense relied on one witness, a forensic psychologist, who testified that Atkins was mildly mentally retarded. The jury sentenced Atkins to death, but the Virginia Supreme Court ordered a second sentencing hearing because the trial court had used a misleading verdict form. During re-sentencing the same forensic psychologist testified, but this time the State rebutted Atkins' intelligence. The jury again sentenced Atkins to death. In affirming, the Virginia Supreme Court relied on Penry v. Lynaugh, in rejecting Atkins' contention that he could not be sentenced to death because he is mentally retarded.
This CLE course is brought to you in cooperation with The Oyez Project. The Oyez Project is a non-profit organization dedicated to preserving an archive of the United States Supreme Court. For more information on the Oyez Project, please visit http://www.Oyez.org.
About the Lecturer
Course Audio Files
Please Login To Listen
Registration is quick and free and gives you access to listen to hundreds of audio files
Course Notes
Please Login To View
Registration is quick and free and gives you access to all of the class notes