Atkins V. Virginia Case Study

When sentencing an offender for a crime, the punishment depends on what the law is attempting to accomplish. The punishment can either be based on incapacitation, retribution, rehabilitation, deterrence, or restorative. Depending on the crime, the punishment can accomplish either one of several of them. However, when it comes to the death penalty it can be quite debatable and there are several criminal cases that came to the United States supreme court due to potential policies being violated that would prevent the offender from getting a proper conviction. One US Supreme Court case that had an issue in sentencing a defendant is Atkins v. Virginia. This case of Atkins v. Virginia (2002) is significant because it had to do with sentencing a

Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002), after an incident in 1996, the defendant, Daryl Renard Atkins, was convicted of abduction, armed robbery, and capital murder in a Virginia trial court. Then at a second capital sentencing hearing, appellate ruling states that the first hearing was a mislead verdict form, “a testimony from a forensic psychologist stated that Atkins was mildly retarded, with an IQ of 59, a prosecution expert witness expressed that the defendant was of at least average intelligence, a jury again sentenced him to death” (Atkins v. Virginia, 2002). The case document of Atkins v. Virginia (2002) states that in an appeal to the supreme court of Virginia, “affirming the imposition of the death penalty relied on the authority of Penry v. Lynaugh (1989), which had to do with the eighth amendment protecting individuals from cruel and unusual punishment, however the case rejected the defendant’s claim as there was no categories that prohibited death sentences on those who were mentally handicapped” (Atkins v. Virginia, 2002). Then on a certiorari, the US supreme court reversed and remanded the sentence, holding that execution of offenders who were mentally handicapped was excessive and thus was prohibited by the eighth amendment, therefore, it was decided on June 20th, 2002 that “execution of criminals that were ‘mentally retarded’ are held as cruel and unusual punishment and in violation of the Eighth Amendment of the constitution” (Atkins

These theories as discussed in Danielle Rudes’ lecture on Correctional Theories (2016) includes Retribution, Deterrence, Incapacitation, restorative justice, rehabilitation, and early intervention. The death sentence is known to use a couple of these theories, mainly retribution, deterrence, or incapacitation. When executing a criminal, the goal is to serve justice for the people the criminal wronged which would be considered as retribution. The criminal justice system would also execute criminals to deter others from committing similar acts but from what was learned in Rudes’ Punishment and corrections lectures it is hardly effective. The death sentence can be considered incapacitation of the offender as discussed in Rudes’ lecture as they would be stopped from committing another crime and would be no longer a threat to and will be out of society, albeit permanently as he or she would be executed rather than spend time locked up in prison. To some extent the death sentence can also bring rehabilitation as it could have the possibility to spark the mind of the prisoner on death row and feel remorse for their actions. In Atkins v. Virginia these theories can be considered null and void. As stated before if a defendant is mentally incompetent than it would inapplicable to deter crime when it must do with