[Deathpenalty] death penalty news-----TEXAS

[Rick Halperin]

Jan. 7



Justices to Consider Impact of Mental Illness on Death Penalty


The Supreme Court agreed on Friday to use the case of a schizophrenic
death row inmate in Texas to set the standard for determining when a
mental illness is so severe that execution would be constitutionally
impermissible.

The question is not a new one for the court or for the criminal justice
system, but it has come to the fore recently as a growing number of legal
and mental health organizations have joined a call for a moratorium on
executing those whose rational judgment has been significantly impaired,
including their ability to appreciate why they have been sentenced to
death.

The American Psychiatric Association has expressed specific concern about
the competency standard used by the United States Court of Appeals for the
Fifth Circuit, which upheld the death sentence for the Texas inmate, Scott
L. Panetti, in rejecting his petition for a writ of habeas corpus last
May.

Mr. Panetti, convicted in 1992 of fatally shooting his in-laws in the
presence of his estranged wife and their 3-year-old child, is a
48-year-old Navy veteran who was hospitalized 14 times for schizophrenia
and other serious mental disorders in the decade before the crime. A jury
nonetheless found him competent to stand trial, and the judge permitted
him to represent himself.

The Supreme Court ruled in 1986 that the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on
cruel and unusual punishment barred the execution of the mentally ill. But
the justices who decided that case, Ford v. Wainwright, did not settle on
a definition of mental illness for the purpose of determining competency
for execution.

Most lower courts have adopted, as controlling, a separate opinion by
Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr., who said that the "retributive goal of the
criminal law" was satisfied as long as defendants were aware of "the
punishment they are about to suffer" and "why they are to suffer it."

The Fifth Circuit, which supervises the courts in Texas, Louisiana and
Mississippi, has boiled this down to what it calls an "awareness" test. In
Mr. Panetti's case, Panetti v. Quarterman, No. 06-6407, the appeals court
found the test was satisfied because Mr. Panetti indicated that he
understood the state's intention to execute him for killing his wife's
parents. The fact that he also held the delusional belief that his
execution was part of a conspiracy by which the state was trying to
prevent him from preaching the Gospel was beside the point, the appeals
court said.

In Mr. Panetti's appeal to the Supreme Court, his lawyers argue that the
appeals court has distorted Justice Powell's meaning by failing to take
the delusions into account. "The moral force of retribution is lost if an
inmate believes that his execution is being carried out through a
conspiracy of demonic forces rather than as a lawful punishment for a
horrific crime," their brief argues.

In a brief urging the justices to accept the appeal, the National Alliance
on Mental Illness, an advocacy organization, said "this case exemplifies
why mere 'awareness,' the test applied by the Fifth Circuit, is not a
meaningful requirement for determining whether to execute prisoners who
are severely mentally ill."

The brief said the test "makes no sense when applied to a prisoner who is
plagued by delusions of grand persecution."

At his trial, Mr. Panetti was often incoherent and tried to issue
subpoenas to Jesus, the pope and John F. Kennedy.

The justices' decision to hear his appeal was the latest indication of the
Supreme Court's concern about the administration of capital punishment. In
recent years, the court has declared unconstitutional the execution of
mentally retarded defendants as well as those who committed murder before
the age of 18. Some opponents of the death penalty have described mental
illness as the next frontier in the debate.

Mr. Panetti's case was 1 of 7 new appeals the court granted on a busy day
as the justices returned from a 4-week recess. The cases will be heard on
dates yet to be determined in March and April.

(source: New York Times)