Jury Pool Members' Beliefs about the Relation between Potential Impairments in Functioning and Mental Retardation: Implications for Atkins-Type Cases

By Boccaccini, Marcus T.; Clark, John W. et al. | Law and Psychology Review, Annual 2010 | Go to article overview

Jury Pool Members' Beliefs about the Relation between Potential Impairments in Functioning and Mental Retardation: Implications for Atkins-Type Cases


Boccaccini, Marcus T., Clark, John W., Kan, Lisa, Caillouet, Beth, Noland, Ramona M., Law and Psychology Review


I. INTRODUCTION

In Atkins v. Virginia, the Supreme Court ruled that executing offenders with mental retardation (MR) constitutes "cruel and unusual punishment[]" (1) prohibited by the Eighth Amendment. (2) Determining whether a defendant is a person with MR is critically important because such a finding will remove the death penalty as a potential punishment. In Atkins-type cases, MR determinations are made by judges or jurors (fact finders), not mental health experts. These fact finders often do not possess specialized knowledge about MR, and the criteria they use to decide whether a defendant is a person with MR may not be consistent with the diagnostic criteria used by mental health professionals. Mental health professionals involved in Atkins-type cases have speculated that most of the general population believes "people with mental retardation have vastly lower abilities" (3) than people without MR. If this speculation is true, it is likely that fact finders will often fail to identify defendants with more moderate impairments as persons with MR, even when these impairments clearly meet diagnostic criteria for MR.

This article presents the results of an empirical study which examined more than eight hundred jury pool members' perceptions about the relation between potential deficits in functioning and MR and compared their perceptions to those of more than eighty mental health professionals who work with persons with MR on a daily basis. Part II provides background information for the study. It begins by defining MR according to official diagnostic criteria and providing an overview of the role jurors play in making MR determinations. Next, the article identifies the areas of functioning examined in the study and explains why jurors are expected to have more accurate perceptions in some areas than others. Part III details the methods used in the study. Part IV presents the results of the study, including comparisons between jury pool members' and mental health professionals' responses. Part V uses the study results to identify implications for legal and mental health practitioners. Part VI summarizes the study and concludes.

II. BACKGROUND INFORMATION

A. Defining MR and Examining the Role of Fact Finders in Making MR Determinations

The Supreme Court did not endorse a specific definition of MR to be applied by state courts in the Atkins decision; however, it implied that state statutes which define MR should generally conform to the diagnostic criteria devised by the American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (AAIDD) and American Psychiatric Association (APA), (4) which are among the most well-known and widely-used criteria in the mental health field. While the AAIDD and APA standards differ in some respects, (5) each identifies three basic components for diagnosing MR: (a) significant subaverage intelligence, (b) significant impairment in adaptive functioning, and (c) evidence that the first two components have been present since the beginning of the developmental period, which is usually before age eighteen. (6)

The AAIDD and APA standards for diagnosing MR were designed for use by mental health professionals, not fact finders. However, while mental health professionals often testify as expert witnesses in Atkins-type cases, (7) fact finders ultimately determine whether the defendant is a person with MR. (8) In fact, the criteria that fact finders use to make decisions about MR in any given case may not necessarily follow AAIDD or APA diagnostic criteria. These points were openly acknowledged in Ex parte Briseno when the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals stated that, while mental health professionals might be able to diagnose a capital defendant with MR, "the ultimate issue of whether [the defendant] is, in fact, mentally retarded for purposes of the Eighth Amendment ban on excessive punishment is one for the finder of fact." (9) Moreover, the court noted that, in addition to diagnostic standards, fact finders might also focus upon other aspects of the defendant's behavior, such as behavior during the crime, (10) a position that is in direct opposition to the recommendations of the AAIDD. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Jury Pool Members' Beliefs about the Relation between Potential Impairments in Functioning and Mental Retardation: Implications for Atkins-Type Cases
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.