Summary Of The Penry Vs. Lynaugh Case

In 1989, The Supreme Court decided the Penry v. Lynaugh case. Penry, the petitioner, was convicted of rape and murder and was sentenced to death. It was found that Penry, in a competency evaluation, was mentally retarded, known today as intellectually disabled, with an IQ of 54 (Penry v. Lynaugh,1989). Despite Penry’s IQ, the jury found that Penry was competent to proceed and further sentenced him to death. Although there was also an insanity plea, the jury rejected the defense and again sentenced him to death. As such, the case went to the Supreme Court with two questions: should the jury consider mitigating evidence presented and is it the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause under the Eighth Amendment to execute an intellectually disabled

They argued that no intellectually disabled person should be executed under the basis of the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution (APA, 1989). They argued that the disabilities related to intellectual disability are directly correlated to a criminal responsibility and the punishment for the criminal activity. They stated that if a person is intellectually disabled they are unable to not only understand their actions, but control their actions because they do not have the cognitive or behavior development that should have occurred during their development (APA, 1989). People with intellectual disabilities have a reduced ability to cope and function in the world because they have severe impairments in judgment making, logical reasoning, strategic thinking, and control of their impulsivity. This relates to the level of their ability to conform to the law’s requirements and to the degree of the defendant’s blame which is an integral part of the insanity defense. The APA also argued that people who are intellectually disabled do not have the level of guilt needed to fulfill the Eighth Amendment’ Cruel and Unusual Punishment clause appropriately and therefore, it should be unconstitutional in those cases. The level of guilt and moral culpability are the key factors in determining death penalty for a person (APA, 1989). It also

Penry in his objection stated that his death sentence was a violation of the Eighth Amendment because he was mentally disabled. While all prior courts rejected the claim, the Supreme Court looked further into the claim and used the American Psychological Association’s amicus brief for their argument. Five Justices concurred in the majority opinion given by Justice O’Connor who used the APA’s brief as a counter- argument. While the brief stated that they opposed the execution of intellectually disabled people because of impairments in both cognitive and behavioral situations, the majority ruled that some have the capacity to understand the guilt of their crime (Penry v. Lynaugh,1989). As such, they would be able to be sentenced to capital punishment if deemed by the jury. It was concluded that not all intellectually disabled people are the same in their impairments and therefore would not violate the Eighth Amendment’s Cruel and Unusual Punishment clause. The minority opinion used the amicus brief to strengthen their argument that intellectually disabled people should not be executed as it violates the Eighth Amendment. The minority opinion was written by Justices Brennan and Marshall who agreed that the question Justice O’Connor posed as to whether is it always unconstitutional for an intellectually disabled person to be