Citation network
Atkins Vs. Virginia
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 20, 2002
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 304 (2002) October Term, 2001 Syllabus Atkins V. VirginiaSearch
-
and related crimes by a Virginia jury and sentenced to death. Mfirming, the Virginia Supreme Court relied on Penry v. LynaughSearch
-
and therefore prohibited by the Amendment, if it is not graduated and proportioned to the offense. E. g., Weems v. UnitedSearch
-
U. S. 349 , 367. An excessiveness claim is judged by currently prevailing standards of decency. Trop v. DullesSearch
-
such evolving standards should be informed by objective factors to the maximum possible extent, see, e. g., Harmelin v. MichiganSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
s culpability. If the culpability of the average murderer is insufficient to justify imposition of death, see Godfrey v. GeorgiaSearch
-
On December 3, 2001, 534 U. S. 1053, the Court granted the motion of amici curiae filers in McCarver v. NorthSearch
-
proceedings against mentally retarded defendants. Presumably for these reasons, in the 13 years since we decided Penry v. LynaughSearch
-
prong of the mental retardation definition. 2 Kaplan & Sadock's Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry 2952 (B. Sadock & v. SadockSearch
-
In Weems v. UnitedSearch
-
We have repeatedly applied this proportionality precept in later cases interpreting the Eighth Amendment. See Harmelin v. MichiganSearch
-
Robinson v. CaliforniaSearch
-
was adopted, but rather by those that currently prevail. As Chief Justice Warren explained in his opinion in Trop v. DullesSearch
-
see Harmelin, 501 U. S., at 1000 (quoting Rummel v. EstelleSearch
-
evidence, we have held that death is an impermissibly excessive punishment for the rape of an adult woman, Coker v. GeorgiaSearch
-
or for a defendant who neither took life, attempted to take life, nor intended to take life, Enmund v. FloridaSearch
-
primarily on the then-recent legislation that had been enacted in response to our decision 10 years earlier in Furman v. GeorgiaSearch
-
offenders. Report of the Governor's Commission on Capital Punishment 156 (Apr. 2002). 18 A comparison to Stanford v. KentuckySearch
-
within the range of mentally retarded offenders about whom there is a national consensus. As was our approach in Ford v. WainwrightSearch
-
further support to our conclusion that there is a consensus among those who have addressed the issue. See Thompson v. OklahomaSearch
-
Everington & Fulero). 319 a basis for the death penalty applies to mentally retarded offenders. Gregg v. GeorgiaSearch
-
confined the imposition of the death penalty to a narrow category of the most serious crimes. For example, in Godfrey v. GeorgiaSearch
-
Stanford v. KenSearch
-
U. S. 302, 331 (1989). See also McCleskey v. KempSearch
-
U. S. 153 , 175-176 (1976) (joint opinion of Stewart, Powell, and STEVENS, JJ.) (quoting Furman v. GeorgiaSearch
-
Gore v. UnitedSearch
-
to cut off the normal democratic processes, Gregg, supra, at 176 (quoting Powell v. TexasSearch
-
Gregg, supra, at 181 (quoting Witherspoon v. IllinoisSearch
-
juries in Georgia did not impose the death sentence for rape convictions. And in Enmund v. FloridaSearch
-
juries are not as reluctant to impose the death penalty on defendants like petitioner as was the case in Coker v. GeorgiaSearch
-
U. S. 584 (1977), and Enmund v. FloridaSearch
-
Coker, supra, at 596, n. 10, to reinforce a conclusion regarding evolving standards of decency, see Thompson v. OklahomaSearch
-
Thompson v. OklahomaSearch
-
see also Stanford v. KentuckySearch
-
Reams v. StateSearch
-
Rondon v. StateSearch
-
Booth v. StateSearch
-
Van Tran v. StateSearch
-
Syllabus Atkins V. VirginiaSearch
-
Weems v. UnitedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial