Statements (98)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| gptkbp:instance_of |
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
|
| gptkbp:argued_on |
March 20, 2002
|
| gptkbp:case_analysis |
Implications for future death penalty cases
Criticized by some legal scholars Analyzed for its constitutional implications Used in law schools for teaching purposes Analyzed for its implications on justice Implications for future legal standards Critiqued for its legal reasoning Discussed in law schools and legal forums Evaluated for its impact on justice system Relevant in discussions of ethics in law Studied as a significant legal case Relevant to discussions on human rights Analyzed by legal scholars and ethicists Influenced state legislatures to revise laws |
| gptkbp:case_debate |
Debated in legal and ethical circles
|
| gptkbp:case_interpretation |
Interpreted in various legal contexts
|
| gptkbp:case_number |
Available in legal databases
Documented in legal archives Documented in Supreme Court records 00-8452 Documented in legal casebooks Background of the case and its development Summary of the case's arguments and decisions |
| gptkbp:case_outcome |
5-4 ruling
Reversed lower court ruling Set a precedent for similar cases Impact on future death penalty cases Impact on legal practices regarding mental health Influenced public policy on mental health and law Outcomes influenced by the ruling Led to moratoriums in some states |
| gptkbp:case_reflection |
Reflected societal views on mental disability
|
| gptkbp:case_repercussions |
Repercussions for state execution laws
|
| gptkbp:case_significance |
Significant in the context of human rights
Highlighted issues of mental health in law |
| gptkbp:case_types |
Constitutional law case
Arguments on mental capacity and culpability Supported by disability rights advocates |
| gptkbp:consequences |
Influenced state laws on capital punishment
Changed execution practices in several states States must reconsider execution policies |
| gptkbp:decided_by |
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
June 20, 2002 |
| gptkbp:dissenting_opinion |
gptkb:Justice_Antonin_Scalia
gptkb:Justice_Clarence_Thomas |
| gptkbp:election |
6-3
|
| gptkbp:followed_by |
subsequent cases addressing mental health in capital punishment
|
| gptkbp:historical_context |
Part of a broader movement against the death penalty
Part of broader movement against death penalty for disabled |
| https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label |
Atkins v. Virginia
|
| gptkbp:influenced |
Public discourse on mental health and criminal justice
|
| gptkbp:influenced_by |
American Psychological Association guidelines
|
| gptkbp:involved_parties |
gptkb:Daryl_Atkins
gptkb:Virginia Daryl Atkins and Virginia state |
| gptkbp:is_cited_in |
536 U. S. 304
536 U. S. 304 (2002) legal arguments against death penalty |
| gptkbp:is_standardized_by |
Intellectual disability
|
| gptkbp:judicial_review |
Judicial review of state laws
Supreme Court review of state law |
| gptkbp:legacy |
Legacy in the context of capital punishment reform
Legacy in the fight against capital punishment |
| gptkbp:legal_context |
Contextualized within the death penalty debate
|
| gptkbp:legal_framework |
Evolving standards of decency
Led to changes in execution practices Part of the legal framework regarding capital punishment |
| gptkbp:legal_issue |
Execution of mentally disabled individuals
Execution of mentally retarded individuals |
| gptkbp:legal_outcome |
Reaffirmed the principle of human dignity
|
| gptkbp:legal_representation |
Analyzed under the Eighth Amendment
Public defender for Atkins |
| gptkbp:legal_standard_established |
Intellectual disability definition in capital cases
|
| gptkbp:material |
Atkins convicted of abduction and murder
|
| gptkbp:outcome |
Death penalty unconstitutional for mentally disabled
Death penalty unconstitutional for mentally retarded |
| gptkbp:precedent |
Eighth Amendment interpretation
Influenced future Supreme Court rulings Atkins v. Virginia established a precedent for similar cases Set a legal precedent for mental disability in capital cases |
| gptkbp:public_perception |
gptkb:Justice_John_Paul_Stevens
|
| gptkbp:public_reaction |
Mixed reactions from the public
Debate on mental disability and capital punishment |
| gptkbp:publications |
Discussed in numerous legal journals
|
| gptkbp:related_cases |
gptkb:Ford_v._Wainwright
gptkb:Roper_v._Simmons Cases involving mental health in capital punishment Followed by further Supreme Court scrutiny |
| gptkbp:responds_to |
gptkb:Commonwealth_of_Virginia
|
| gptkbp:scholarly_analysis |
Discussed in legal journals and articles
|
| gptkbp:signatories |
gptkb:Daryl_Atkins
|
| gptkbp:significance |
Clarified standards for cruel and unusual punishment
Impact on death penalty laws |
| gptkbp:bfsParent |
gptkb:William_Rehnquist
gptkb:William_H._Rehnquist |
| gptkbp:bfsLayer |
4
|