WPC# >U0)8'eSؕA>-]<-ra2X[”q㾁VKkKLK ]KL (3L   A.0 ` Atkinsv._Virgina_ .` (#` (#   InAtkinsv.Virginia,theSupremeCourtheldthatthe d EighthAmendmentsbanonexcessiveandcruelandunusualpunishmentsprohibitstheexecutionofindividualswithmentalretardation.Reversingitspriordecisionin_Penry_Ԁv._Lynaugh_, h  492U.S.3003(1989),theCourtconcludedthattheConstitution placesasubstantiverestrictionontheStatespowertotakethelifeofamentallyretardedoffender.122S.Ct.at2252,quotingFordv.Wainwright,477U.S.399,405(1986). }&"(   TheCourtfirstestablishedthatafundamental preceptofjusticeisthat punishmentforcrimeshouldbegraduatedandproportionedtotheoffense.122S.Ct.at2246(internal +'. citationsomitted).TheCourtmadeclearthatdetermining e whetherapunishmentisconstitutionallyexcessiveorcruelandunusual #  2      ׀isjudgedbycurrentnorms,notbythosewhichexisted X atthetimetheEighthAmendmentwasratified.Id.at2247.The i  coreEighthAmendmentconceptisthe dignityofmanandthusitsconstitutionalcontentmustbeinformedby theevolvingstandardsofdecencythatmarktheprogressofamaturingsociety.122S.Ct.at2247(quotingTropv.Dulles,356U.S. %  86,10001(1958)).Theevolvingstandard,theCourtdeclared,shouldbeinformedby objectivefactorstothemaximumextentpossible,themostreliableevidenceofwhichisfoundinstatelegislativeenactmentsandjuryverdicts.Id.However,the p Courtadheredtotheconstitutionalprinciplethat intheendourownjudgmentwillbebroughttobearonthequestionoftheacceptabilityofthedeathpenaltyundertheEighthAmendment.Id.(quoting_Coker_Ԁv.Georgia,433U.S.584,597(1977)). ,   Uponexamination,theCourtconcludedthattheevolvingstandardshadinfactdemonstratedamarkedshiftsince_Penry_.  " Thepracticeofexecutingthementallyretardedhadbecome trulyunusual,itwas fairtosay,accordingtotheCourt,that anationalconsensushasdevelopedagainstit.Atkins,122S.Ct. %!( 2247. '@#*   Theconsensusreflectedajudgmentaboutthe relativeculpabilityofmentallyretardedoffendersandtherelationshipbetweenmentalretardationandthe_penological_Ԁpurposesservedbythedeathpenalty.122S.Ct.at2250.TheCourtnotedthat,duetotheirimpairments,defendantswithmentalretardation havediminishedcapacitiestounderstandandprocessinformation,tocommunicate,toabstractfrommistakesandlearnfromexperience,tocontrolimpulsesandtounderstandthereactionsofothers.Id.Thesedeficiencies,whilenot `  justifyinganexemptionfromcriminalliability,dodiminishamentallyretardedpersonspersonalculpabilitytotheextentthatneitherofthejustificationsadvancedbystatesinsupportofthedeathpenalty!retributionanddeterrence!wouldbeservedbypermittingaretardedpersonsexecution.Id. ! Retributioninthecapitalcontexthadbeenlimitedtoensuringthat onlythemostdeservingofexecutionareputtodeath.122S.Ct.at2252.Since justdessertsnecessarilydependsontheculpabilityoftheoffender,themostextremepunishmentwasdeemedexcessiveduetothe lesserculpabilityofthementallyretardedoffender.Id.󀀀And,becausecapitalpunishmentcan 5$& onlyserveasadeterrentwhenacrimeistheresultofpremeditationanddeliberation,i.e.,whenthethreatofdeathwill inhibitcriminalactorsfromcarryingoutmurderousconduct,nodeterrenceinterestsareserved.Id.Thistypeof *&. calculus,theCourtnoted,isatthe oppositeendofthespectrumfromthebehaviorofthementallyretardedduetotheircognitiveandbehavioralimpairments.Id. #  3      ׀ X   Inadditiontoconcludingthatretentionofthedeathpenaltyformentallyretardeddefendantswouldnotfurtheranylegitimateinterestinretributionordeterrence,theCourtalsoopinedthatthereducedcapacityofmentallyretardedoffendersprovideda secondjustificationforacategoricalrulemakingsuchoffendersineligibleforthedeathpenalty.Id.at2251. l  Duetotheirimpairments,therewereahostoffactors,fromtheincreasedriskoffalseconfessions,difficultiesincommunicatingwithcounsel,andtheirlesserabilityduetolimitedcommunicationskilltoeffectivelytestifyontheirownbehalforexpressremorsethat, intheaggregate,carriedanunacceptable riskofwrongfulexecutionsformentallyretardeddefendants.' #  4      ׀Id. ,   Thus,theCourtconcludedthatits independentevaluationoftheissuerevealsnoreasonstodisagreewiththejudgmentof  " thelegislaturesthathave...concludedthatdeathisnotasuitablepunishmentforamentallyretardedcriminal,andthustheConstitution placesasubstantiverestrictionontheStatespowertotakethelifeofamentallyretardedoffender.Id.(quotingFordv.Wainwright,477U.S.399,405(1986).      B. ` ProceduralDueProcess .  h    Anessentialprincipleofdueprocessisthatadeprivationoflife,libertyorpropertybeprecededbynoticeandopportunityforhearingappropriatetothenatureofthecase.ClevelandBd.ofEd.v._Loudermill_,470U.S.532,542(1985), 4 quoting_Mullane_Ԁv.CentralHanoverBank&TrustCo.,339U.S. E 306,313(1950). [_F]undamental_ԀfairnessisthehallmarkoftheproceduralprotectionsaffordedbytheDueProcessClause.Ford 8 v.Wainwright,477U.S.399,424(1986)(Powell,J.,concurringin I partandconcurringinthejudgment).  InFord,theUnitedStatesSupremeCourtrecognizeda < substantiverightundertheEighthAmendment,therighttonotbeexecutedwhileinsane.477U.S.at410.HavingrecognizedanewsubstantiverightundertheEighthAmendment,theSupremeCourtexplained:` OnceasubstantiverightorrestrictionisrecognizedintheConstitution,therefore,itsenforcementisinnowayconfinedtotherudimentaryprocessdeemedadequateinagespast.` Pj^jFord,477U.S.at410.Incapitalproceedings,theSupremeCourt +*%- held, thisCourthasdemandedthat_factfinding_Ԁproceduresaspire +r'/ toaheightenedstandardofreliability.Id.at411.InFord, e theSupremeCourtreviewedtheproceduresemployedbyFloridatoresolveclaimsofincompetencytobeexecutedandconcludedthattheproceduresdidnotcomportwithdueprocess:` HavingidentifiedvariousfailingsoftheFloridascheme,wemustconcludethattheStatesproceduresfordeterminingsanityareinadequatetoprecludefederalredeterminationoftheconstitutionalissue.` :mHmӀId.at416. C    FollowingthedecisioninFord,GovernorGrahamaskedthe   FloridaSupremeCourttopromulgaterulesofproceduretogovernproceedingstodeterminecompetencytobeexecuted.Inre: G EmergencyAmendmenttoFloridaRulesofCriminalProcedure,497  So.2d643(Fla.1986).ThisCourtpursuanttoits_rulemaking_poweradoptedanemergencyruleandrequestedtheCriminalLawSectionoftheFloridaBartoformulateapermanentrule.L A%((L  SincethedecisioninAtkins,GovernorBushhasnot > requestedthepromulgationofaruleofproceduretogovernresolutionofmentalretardationclaims.NorhasthisCourtissuedanemergencyrule.Thus,Floridahasyettodevelopan appropriatewaytodealwiththisissue.  C. ` ValidityofStatute.  $ '   TotheextentthattheLegislatureadoptedastatute(section921.137,Fla.Stat.2001),thestatuteisunconstitutional.First,thestatuteonitsfacedoesnotapplytoindividualsunderasentenceofdeathatthetimeofits +f'/ adoption.TheLegislaturedidnotintendforthestatutetocoverthosedeathsentenceddefendantslitigatingthevalidityoftheirdeathsentencesincollateralproceedings.TheLegislaturedidnotintendforthestatutetoapplyinthecollateralprocessandprovideprocedureforresolvingclaimsofmentalretardationafteradirectappeal_affirmance_Ԁofasentenceofdeath. #  5      ׀  \    AfterAtkins,itisclearthatthelegislativeeffortto m  limitthesubstantiverighttothosenotalreadyundersentenceofdeathviolatestheEighthAmendment.Atkinsapplies `  retroactivelytothosealreadyunderafinalsentenceofdeath.Bellv._Cockrell_,!F.3d!,5thCir.CaseNo.0140340(5thCir.  Oct.17,2002);Hillv.Anderson,300F.3d679(6thCir.2002); d Pulliamv.People,N.E.2d,2002WL31341298(Ill.2002); u Murphyv.State,54P.3s556(Okla.Cr.App.2002).Becausethe ! statuteonitsfacedoesnotapplytothosewhosedeathsentenceswerealreadyinplaceatthetimeitwassignedintolaw,thestatutedoesnotcomportwiththeEighthAmendment.  Courtscannotrewritestatutesinafashionthatiscontrarytoclearlegislativeintent.Theproceduralaspectsofsection921.137wasnotintendedtoapplytoincollateralproceedings.Circuitjudgesarenotempoweredtorewritelegislation.See %p!( Johnsonv.State,660So.2d637,647(Fla.1995)(courtrejected e theargumentthatthejudgeshouldhavemodifiedstandardjuryinstructiononthementalmitigatorstotakeoutthewords extremeand substantialbecauseit ineffectaskedthetrialcourttorewritethestatutorydescriptionofmentalmitigators,whichisaviolationoftheseparationofpowersdoctrine),citingArt.II,sec.3,Fla.Const.;Statev.Elder,382So.2d m  687(Fla.1980)( TheCourtisresponsibletoresolvealldoubtsastothevalidityofastatuteinfavorofitsconstitutionality,providedthestatutemaybegivenafairconstructionthatisconsistentwiththefederalandstateconstitutionsaswellaswiththelegislativeintent.Thecourtwillnow,however,abandonjudicialrestraintandinvadetheprovinceofthelegislaturebyrewritingitsterms.);Brownv. ! State,358So.2d16,20(Fla.1978)( whenthesubjectstatutein h nowaysuggestsasavingconstruction,wewillnotabandonjudicialrestraintandeffectivelyrewritetheenactment);_Kunz_ %  v.NewYork,340U.S.290(1951)(Frankfurter,J.,concurring).  l" ( Thejudicialbodymightquestionwithjustificationwhetheritsinterpretationisworkableorwhetheritisconsistentwithlegislativepolicywhich,isasyet,undetermined.).  Moreover,theFloridastatuteprovidesavaguedefinitionofsortsformentalretardation,Section921.137(4)butleavesittotheDepartmentofChildrenandFamilyServicestospecifythe *t&. standardizedintelligencetestsnecessaryfortheproperdeterminationofmentalretardation.TheDepartment hasnot yet  specifiedtestsandtherulerelatingtomentallyretardeddefendantsisstillbeingdeveloped.SeeattachmentA._ #  6      _Ԁ   Standardswhicharenotyetinplacecannotbesaidtoprovidenoticeandanopportunitytobeheard.ClevelandBd.OfEduc.  x  v._Loudermill_,470U.S.532,542(1985)( essentialprincipleof $  dueprocessisthatadeprivationoflife...beprecededbynoticeandopportunityforhearingappropriatetothenatureofthecase).  Thedueprocessviolationisbetterunderstoodwhenconsiderationisgiventothepurposestandardizedtestsserve.Therearevariousstandardizedintelligencetestswithdifferentstandardizationsamples.Differenttestscapturedifferentabilities.SeegenerallyAmericanAssociationonMentalRetardation,MentalRetardation:Definition,Classification,andSystemsofSupport(10thed.2002).Eachtest,thereforecan A  resultinadifferenttestscore.Id.BecauseSection921.137  " requiresa meanscoreonastandardizedintelligencetestspecifiedintherulesoftheDepartmentofChildrenandFamilyServicesinordertodetermine significantly_subaverage_Ԁgeneralintellectualfunctioning,thereisnodefinitionofwhatmental '8#* retardationisinthestatute.Thus,theabsenceofdesignatedstandardizedtestingandthefailuretodelineateaspecificnumericalscoreasacutoffprovidesnonoticeandopportunitytobemeaningfulheardonthequestionofwhetherPetitionersarementallyretarded.AstheUnitedStatesSupremeCourthasexplained:` theproceduresbywhichthefactsofthecasearedeterminedassumeanimportancefullyasgreatasthevalidityofthesubstantiveruleoflawtobeapplied.Andthemoreimportanttherightsatstakethemoreimportantmustbetheproceduralsafeguardssurroundingthoseright.` _Speiser_Ԁv.Randall,357U.S.513,52021(1958). G   Moreover,thisCourthasclearlyheldthat theLegislaturehaspowertoenactsubstantivelaw,whiletheCourthasthepowertoenactprocedurallaw.Allenv._Butterworth_,756So.2d52,59 K (Fla.2000). ArticleV,section2(a)statesthattheFloridaSupremeCourthastheexclusiveauthoritytoadoptrulesforthepracticeandprocedureinallcourts,includingthetimeforseekingappellatereview.Id.Thelegislaturemaynotusurp ! thisCourtsauthoritywithoutrunningafouloftheconstitutionallymandatedseparationofpowers.Allen. S#%   FollowingFord,thisCourtpromulgatedtherulesof $ ' procedureforconsiderationofFordclaims.Martinv._Dugger_, &F") 515So.2d185,186(Fla.1987)( WeadoptedanemergencyruleofcriminalprocedurepertainingtocompetencytobeexecutedinresponsetoMartinspetition).WhenthisCourtrecognizedthat +J'/ acapitaldefendanthadasubstantiverighttobecompetentduringcollateralproceedings,thisCourtdesignatedtemporaryrulesandinitiatedtheprocessforpromulgatingpermanentrulestogoverntheprocedureforvindicationofthesubstantiveright.Carterv.State,706So.2d873(Fla.1998).Whenthelegislature   establishedthesubstantiverightforpostconvictionDNAtesting,thisCourtpromulgatedrulesofproceduretogoverningthevindicationofthatnewlycreatedright.   TheUnitedStatesSupremeCourtrecognizedthecriticalneed `  forproceduralrulestogoverntheprocessbywhichsubstantiverightsarevindicated:` [_T]he_Ԁlodestarofanyefforttodeviseaproceduremustbetheoverridingdualimperativeofprovidingredressforthosewithsubstantialclaimsandofencouragingaccuracyinthe_factfinding_Ԁdetermination.Thestakesarehigh,andthe evidencewillalwaysbeimprecise.Itisallthemoreimportantthattheadversarypresentationofrelevantinformationbeasunrestrictedaspossible.Alsoessentialisthatthemannerofselectingandusingexpertsresponsibleforproducingthat evidencebeconducivetotheformulationofneutral,sound,andprofessionaljudgmentsastotheprisonersabilitytocomprehendthenatureofthepenalty._Fidelty_Ԁtotheseprinciplesisthesolemnobligationofacivilizedsociety.` Fordv.Wainwright,477U.S.at417. S#% b (8(Ab  Withoutproperguidelinesorstandardsinplace,circuitcourtshaveusurpedthisCourtsexclusiveauthoritytowritetherulesgoverningmentalretardationclaimsbydeathsentenceddefendants.Rulesmustbepromulgated;but,itisthisCourtsexclusiveauthoritytopromulgaterulesofprocedureforthe +J'/ courtsofthisstate.Allenv._Butterworth_,756So.2dat59. e   D.IssuestoBeAddressedbyRule.         ItisnowincumbentonthisCourttoestablishproceduresforcaseswhereevidenceofmentalretardationispresented.PetitionerswilladdressseveralofthemorepressingissuesraisedbyAtkinsbelow.  x     ` 1.WhatistheDefinitionofMentalRetardation? $    Thedefinitionofmentalretardationiswellestablished.TheAmericanAssociationofMentalRetardationdefinesmental   retardationasreferringto,8  [_S]ubstantial_Ԁlimitationinpresentfunctioning.Itischaracterizedbysignificantly_subaverage_Ԁintellectualfunctioning,existingconcurrentlywithrelatedlimitationsintwoormoreofthefollowingapplicableadaptiveskillareas:communication,selfcare,homeliving,socialskills,communityuse,selfdirection,healthandsafety,functionalacademics,leisure,andwork.    MentalRetardation:Definition,Classification,andSystemsof f Support5(9thed.1992).TheAmericanPsychiatricAssociation  usesasimilardefinition.SeeDiagnosticandStatisticalManual ; ! ofMentalDisordersIVTRat41.TheAtkinsCourtcitedthese !# definitionswithapproval.122S.Ct.at2245,n.3.This #F% definitionisinaccordwithboththe_AAMR_ԀandAmericanPsychiatricAssociationdefinitionsapprovedinAtkins,and '") shouldbethebenchmarkforassessingpostAtkinsclaimsof (J$+ mentalretardation.   ` 2.WhoMakestheMentalRetardationDetermination? ,'/   AnotherissuethisCourtmustresolveiswhomakesthedeterminationwhetherthedefendantismentallyretarded:thejudgeorthejury?Ananalysisofthecurrentlegallandscape,includinganothercasedecidedbytheSupremeCourtthisterm,Ringv.Arizona,122S.Ct.2428(2002),indicatesthatbothjudge   andjuryhaveasignificantroletoplay.  UnderRing,theSixthAmendmentrequiresthatanyfindingof m  factthatmakesadefendanteligibleforthedeathpenaltymustbeunanimouslymadebythejurybeyondareasonabledoubt.122S.Ct.at2440. #  7      ׀WhileRingdealtspecificallywithstatutory q  aggravatingcircumstances,itincluded _factfinding[s_]necessaryto...put[adefendant]todeath.Id.at2443.Asset p forthpreviously,AtkinsheldthattheEighthAmendmentprohibits ( amentallyretardeddefendantfrombeingsentencedtodeath.Thus,amentallyretardeddefendantisnowconstitutionallyineligibleforthedeathpenalty.122S.Ct.at2252.Sincementalretardationisnowafactualissueuponwhichadefendantseligibilityfordeathturns, thatfact...mustbe foundbyajurybeyondareasonabledoubt.Ring,122S.Ct.at "0$ 2439.X4XXXA}_ #  8      _#XA}XXX4y# e  @% CONCLUSION   b !(88 b  SincetheUnitedStatesConstitutionprohibitstheexecutionofthementallyretarded,thenataminimum,personssubjecttothatrulemusthavenoticeofthecontrollingstandardandthegoverningrulesofprocedure,sothathisvoicecanbeheardinaprocessadoptedfordeterminingthe factandforvindicatingthesubstantiveright. [_T]he_Ԁproceduresbywhichthefactsofthe 5  casearedeterminedassumeanimportanceasgreatasthevalidityofthesubstantiveruleoflawtobeapplied.Andthemore ( importanttherightsatstakethemoreimportantmustbetheproceduralsafeguardssurroundingthoserights._Speiser_Ԁv.  Randall,357U.S.at520. X b "(8 8!b  PetitionersalsoasserttheirpositionthatunderRingv. i  Arizona,theyareentitledtoajurytrialtodeterminewhether   theyarementallyretarded.Ringrequiresthatcapital  \  defendantsareentitledtoajurydeterminationofanyfactonwhichthelegislatureconditionsanincreaseintheirmaximumpunishment.AjurytrialonPetitionersmentalretardationisnecessaryinlightofRingbecauseitisafactwhichifnot q  proven,willincreasetheirmaximumpunishment.SeeMurphyv.  Oklahoma,2002OKCR32(September4,2002)( Unlesstheissueof d mentalretardationisresolvedpriortotrial,theissueofmentalretardationshallbedecidedinthesentencingstageofacapitalmurdertrial.)  WHEREFORE ,PetitionersrespectfullyrequestthatthisCourt y promulgaterulesofprocedurethatwillgoverntheprocessbywhichtheymayvindicatetheirrightsunderAtkinsv.Virginia.  "   "4$ TERRIL._BACKHUS__Backhus_Ԁ&_Izakowitz_,P.A.P.O.Box3294Tampa,FL33601AttorneyforClarenceJonesRACHAELDAY_CCRC_ԄSouth101_N.E._Ԁ3rdAvenue,Suite400 I)$, FortLauderdale,FL33301AttorneyforCharlie_Kight_ +f'/ ERIC_PINKARD__CCRC_ԄMiddle3801_Corporex_ԀParkDrive,Suite201Tampa,FL33619AttorneyforCharlieThompsonRICHARDKILEY_CCRC_ԄMiddle3801_Corporex_ԀParkDrive,Suite201Tampa,FL33619AttorneyforGregory_Capehart_PAMELAH._IZAKOWITZ__CCRC_ԄSouthP.O.Box3294Tampa,FL33601AttorneyforJamesFloyd   _   ___________________ G PAMELAH._IZAKOWITZ_COUNSELFORPETITIONERS   ! !IHEREBYCERTIFY! !thatatruecopyoftheforegoingpetition d hasbeenfurnishedbyUnitedStatesMail,firstclasspostageprepaid,toallcounselofrecord;C.MarieKing/_T.R._Ԁ_McGarry_,OfficeoftheStateAttorney,P.O.Box5038,Clearwater,FL33758;Carol_Dittmar_,OfficeoftheAttorneyGeneral,2002N.LoisAvenue,Tampa,FL33607;EddieD.Evans,AssistantStateAttorney,LeonCountyCourthouse,4thFloor,301S.Monroe v _Street,Tallahassee_,FL32399;_Thereasa_ԀL.Phillips,AssistantStateAttorney,_Duval_ԀCountyStateAttorneysOffice,330E.BayStreet,Jacksonville,FL32202;CurtisFrench,OfficeoftheAttorneyGeneral,P101,TheCapitol,Tallahassee,FL323991050;PhilVanAllen,Asst.StateAttorney,PascoCountyCourthouse,38053LiveOakAve.,DadeCity,FL33523;Sharon_Vollrath_,Asst.StateAttorney,CourthouseAnnex!5thFloor,800E.Kennedy,Tampa,FL33602onOctober23,2002.   `     h " "______________________  &!(    `     h PAMELAH._IZAKOWITZ_" " &")    `     h Fla.BarNo.0053856   `     h CapitalCollateralRegionalCounsel   `     h South   `     h 303S.WestlandAvenue   `     h Tampa,FL33606   `     h (813)2594424  ,'/ cc:C.MarieKing/_T.R._Ԁ_McGarry_OfficeoftheStateAttorneyP.O.Box5038Clearwater,FL33758Carol_Dittmar_OfficeoftheAttorneyGeneral2002N.LoisAvenueTampa,FL336070  0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(# p      \ (#(# EddieD.EvansAssistantStateAttorneyLeonCountyCourthouse4thFloor   301S.MonroeStreetTallahassee,FL32399_Thereasa_ԀL.PhillipsAssistantStateAttorney_Duval_ԀCountyStateAttorneysoffice330E.BayStreetJacksonville,FL32202CurtisFrenchOfficeoftheAttorneyGeneralP101TheCapitalTallahassee,FL323991050PhilVanAllenAsst.StateAttorneyPascoCountyCourthouse38053LiveOakAve.DadeCity,FL33523Sharon_Vollrath_Asst.StateAttorneyCourthouseAnnex!5thFloor800E.KennedyTampa,FL33602