Ford v. Wainwright
| Ford v. Wainwright | |
|---|---|
 U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | |
| Subsequent | Post-conviction relief denied at, Writ of habeas corpus denied Ford v. State, 522 So. 2d 345 (Fla., 1988) |
| Holding | |
| The Eighth Amendment prohibits the execution of the insane. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Marshall (parts I and II), joined by Brennan, Blackmun, Powell, Stevens |
| Plurality | Marshall (parts III, IV and V), joined by Brennan, Blackmun, Stevens |
| Concurrence | Powell (in part and in judgment) |
| Concur/dissent | O'Connor, joined by White |
| Dissent | Rehnquist, joined by Burger |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amends. VIII, XIV | |
Ford v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 399 (1986), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the common law rule that the insane cannot be executed; therefore the petitioner is entitled to a competency evaluation and to an evidentiary hearing in court on the question of their competency to be executed.[1]
Background
Alvin Bernard Ford was convicted of
A panel of three psychiatrists was eventually called to
Opinion
The Court, in an opinion by
The Court then further addressed the procedural issues present in making a determination of insanity for Eighth Amendment concerns. The court found that such a determination could not be left solely to the
In their dissents, Justices O'Connor and White claimed that execution of the insane was not per se unconstitutional. The Justices further commented, however, that states had a right to create certain protected liberties in state statutes, of which a prohibition on the execution of the insane was a liberty which could be validly created. Once validly created by a state, that liberty required the minimum due-process protections afforded to other constitutionally protected liberties, which sole action by the executive branch, as in this case, would still fail to provide.[1]
Justice Rehnquist, in dissent, stated a belief that in common-law tradition, it was actually the executive branch that was the sole arbiter of decisions involving the sanity of prisoners sentenced to death. In this respect, Justice Rehnquist felt that the majority had formed its opinion at the "expense of 'our common law heritage'".[1]
The inmate was transferred to Florida State Hospital for treatment after he was reevaluated and found to be incompetent to be executed.[2][3]
In 1989, a federal district judge ruled that Ford was sane, but defense lawyers appealed that ruling.
The appeal was pending when Ford died of a respiratory illness on February 6, 1991, at 37.[4]
See also
- Panetti v. Quarterman (2007)
- Penry v. Lynaugh (1989)
- List of criminal competencies
- List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 477
- List of United States Supreme Court cases
- Lists of United States Supreme Court cases by volume
- List of United States Supreme Court cases by the Rehnquist Court
References
- ^ a b c d e f Ford v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 399 (1986).
- ISBN 9780803951501. Retrieved October 3, 2007.
- ^ "Executing the Mentally Ill". Sage. April 22, 1986. Retrieved October 3, 2007.
- ^ "Alvin Ford, 37, Dies; Stricken on Death Row". March 9, 1991. Archived from the original on January 13, 2013. Retrieved April 28, 2016.
External links
- Text of Ford v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 399 (1986) is available from: Findlaw Google Scholar Justia Oyez (oral argument audio)