| Penry v. Lynaugh |
Supreme Court of the United States |
Argued January 11, 1989
Decided June 26, 1989 |
| Full case name |
Johnny Paul Penry v. Lynaugh, Director of the Texas Department of Corrections |
| Citations |
492 U.S. 302 (more) |
| Prior history |
Writ of habeas corpus challenging death sentence denied by United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas; affirmed by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, 832 F.2d 915 (5th Cir. 1987); cert. granted, 487 U.S. 1233 (1988) |
| Subsequent history |
Subsequent death sentence affirmed by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals and then the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas; affirmed by the Fifth Circuit, 215 F.3d 504 (5th Cir. 2000); sentence vacated, 532 U.S. 782 (2001) |
| Holding |
| The Eighth Amendment does not forbid executing the mentally retarded; however, the three "special issues" a Texas jury is required to consider before imposing the death penalty did not adequately allow the jury in Penry's sentencing hearing to consider his alleged mental retardation as a mitigating factor. |
| Court membership |
|
|
| Case opinions |
| Majority |
O'Connor |
| Concur/dissent |
Brennan, joined by Marshall |
| Concur/dissent |
Stevens, joined by Blackmun |
| Concur/dissent |
Scalia, joined by Rehnquist, White, Kennedy |
| Laws applied |
| U.S. Const. amend. VIII |
|
Overruled by
|
| Atkins v. Virginia |
Penry v. Lynaugh, 492 U.S. 302 (1989), sanctioned the death penalty for mentally retarded offenders because the Court determined executing the mentally retarded was not "cruel and unusual punishment" under the Eighth Amendment. However, because Texas law did not allow the jury to give adequate consideration as a mitigating factor to Johnny Paul Penry's mental retardation at the sentencing phase of his murder trial, the Court remanded the case for further proceedings. Eventually, Penry was retried for capital murder, again sentenced to death, and again the Supreme Court ruled, in Penry v. Johnson, 532 U.S. 782 (2001), that the jury was not able to adequately consider Penry's mental retardation as a mitigating factor at the sentencing phase of the trial. Ultimately, Penry was spared the death penalty because of the Supreme Court's ruling in Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002), which, while not directly overruling the holding in "Penry I", did give considerable negative treatment to "Penry" on the basis that the Eighth Amendment allowed execution of the mentally retarded.
 |
This section is empty. You can help by adding to it. (July 2010) |
Opinion of the Court [edit]
The court ruled that the execution of the mentally retarded does not violate the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishments.
Concurring and dissenting opinions [edit]
|
This section is empty. You can help by adding to it. (July 2010) |
See also [edit]
External links [edit]
