|
|
| U.S. Supreme Court to hear Texas Death Row case |
| By Knight Ridder News Service |
| Published: 03/29/2004 |
|
Robert Tennard's IQ is 67 -- low enough that he's considered barely educable by most standards. But a Texas court said that alone doesn't prove he is retarded enough to avoid the death penalty for a 1985 murder, and the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed. Even if Tennard is retarded, both courts say he would still have to show that his disability is permanent, that it wasn't caused by alcohol or drug abuse, and that it robbed him of the ability to appreciate the nature of his crime. Today, Tennard's attorneys will tell the Supreme Court that those extra burdens violate two high-court rulings intended to spare feeble-minded inmates from execution. They'll say the 5th Circuit in particular has made it nearly impossible for mentally retarded capital defendants to win relief for even the most serious impairments. "Really, the Supreme Court has become our only hope in cases like this because the other courts are so biased toward the prosecution," said Richard Burr, one of Tennard's attorneys. "Their opinions read like briefs for the prosecutors rather than reasoned opinions from judges." Tennard's case could mark the third time in the last year that the Supreme Court comes down on Texas courts and the 5th Circuit for not taking its death-penalty safeguards seriously. Last spring the justices issued a scathing 7-2 ruling that said the 5th Circuit had too easily disregarded a black inmate's claims that Dallas prosecutors had illegally eliminated African-Americans from his jury. In February, the court chastised the 5th Circuit again for rebuffing a Texas man's appeal even though prosecutors admitted that they hid evidence from his attorneys. In Tennard's case, Burr said the justices have the chance to widen the 5th Circuit's view of how two high-court rulings on mentally retarded inmates should be applied. Tennard was convicted of stabbing to death Larry Neblett, a neighbor whom he knew, during a robbery at Neblett's house in Harris County on Aug. 15, 1985. Tennard was sentenced by a jury that was told to answer only two questions in deciding whether he should live or die: Was his crime deliberate? Would he pose a danger in the future if he were released? Tennard's attorneys say answering only those questions prevented the jury from properly considering his low IQ as a mitigating factor in his crime, violating a 1989 Supreme Court ruling that required judges to tell juries to consider mental impairments at capital sentencing. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals denied that claim, and a federal district court and the 5th Circuit agreed. They said Tennard didn't qualify for consideration under the 1989 ruling because his attorneys hadn't argued that he is retarded, only that he has a low IQ. Tennard appealed to the Supreme Court. While his case was pending, the justices issued another strong statement about the death penalty, this time ruling against executing retarded prisoners. The justices vacated the 5th Circuit's ruling in Tennard's case and ordered the appeals court to reconsider in light of the new rule. The 5th Circuit did so but said the new ruling didn't apply to Tennard because he hadn't raised it in his appeal. The Supreme Court then agreed to a full hearing of Tennard's case. |
MARKETPLACE search vendors | advanced search
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT
|
Comments:
No comments have been posted for this article.
Login to let us know what you think