Cornell University Law School Death Penalty project

As a result of my reading of recent law review articles, I discovered (may not be new to most of ICDP readers) the Cornell University Law School Death Penalty Project, directed by John Blume.  I've recently featured two law review articles by Blume et al. (click here and here)  This looks like an excellent resource to monitor....as I shall.  I've just started poking around their links and must say that their is a wealth of useful information and links to other resources, many that I will add to the blogroll of ICDP.

As stated at the projects web page:

The Cornell Death Penalty Project is an undertaking of the Cornell Law School. The project sponsors several clinics that provide students with the opportunity to assist in the representation of capital defendants, both at trial and at various stages in the appeals process. The project also sponsors periodic symposia related to capital punishment and, in addition, conducts empirical research relating to the administration of capital punishment in the United States.

Technorati Tags: psychology, mental retardation, MR, intellectual disability, neuropsychology, school psychology, educational psychology, forensic psychology, Atkins cases, capital punishment, death penalty, SCOTUS, Cornell Law School, Cornell Death Penalty Project, APA Div 33, APA Div 41, forensic psychology

Deviations from MR definitions in Atkins death penalty cases: Another law review article of interest

Ran across yet another interesting Atkins-related law review article by Blume et al. (click here for other article recently posted).

Blume, J. J., Johnson, S. L. & Seeds, C. (2009)  Of Atkins and men:  Deviations from clinical definitions of mental retardation in death penalty cases. Cornell Law School Legal Studies Research Papers.  Click here to view or download.

I've signed up for their "alert" service regarding articles related to the death penalty and will post links to those that may be of interest to ICDP readers.

Abstract

Under Atkins v. Virginia, the Eighth Amendment exempts from execution individuals who meet the clinical definitions of mental retardation set forth by the American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities and the American Psychiatric Association. Both define mental retardation as significantly subaverage intellectual functioning accompanied by significant limitations in adaptive functioning, originating before the age of 18. Since Atkins, most jurisdictions have adopted definitions of mental retardation that conform to those definitions. But some states, looking often to stereotypes of persons with mental retardation, apply exclusion criteria that deviate from and are more restrictive than the accepted scientific and clinical definitions. These state deviations have the effect of excluding from Atkins’s reach some individuals who plainly fall within the class it protects. This article focuses on the cases of Roger Cherry, Jeffrey Williams, Michael Stallings and others, who represent an ever-growing number of individuals inappropriately excluded from Atkins. Left unaddressed, the state deviations discussed herein permit what Atkins does not: the death-sentencing and execution of some capital defendants who have mental retardation.

Technorati Tags: psychology, forensic psychology, criminal psychology, criminal justice, ABA, American Bar Association, Cornell Law School, educational psychology, school psychology, neuropsychology, Atkins cases, MR, mental retardation, intellectual disability, IQ, IQ tests, IQ scores, law review articles, SCOTUS