Triple

Given a phrase, classify it is english named entity (e.g., persons, organizations, works of art) in Latin script, or not (e.g., literals, dates, URLs, verbose phrases). For disambiguation, the statement where the phrase occurs as object is also given. Please return a JSON object with `phrase` (string, the phrase being analyzed) and `is_ne` (boolean, indicating whether the phrase is a Named Entity).

Phrase: Texas’s special-issue capital sentencing scheme did not allow the jury to give full mitigating effect to evidence of Penry’s intellectual disability and childhood abuse | Statement: [Penry v. Lynaugh, 492 U.S. 302 (1989), holding, Texas’s special-issue capital sentencing scheme did not allow the jury to give full mitigating effect to evidence of Penry’s intellectual disability and childhood abuse]

Target entity: Texas’s special-issue capital sentencing scheme did not allow the jury to give full mitigating effect to evidence of Penry’s intellectual disability and childhood abuse
Context triple: [Penry v. Lynaugh, 492 U.S. 302 (1989), holding, Texas’s special-issue capital sentencing scheme did not allow the jury to give full mitigating effect to evidence of Penry’s intellectual disability and childhood abuse]

• A. Texas’s special-issues capital sentencing scheme did not allow the jury to give full mitigating effect to evidence of Penry’s intellectual disability and childhood abuse chosen
  Penry v. Lynaugh is a 1989 U.S. Supreme Court decision addressing the constitutionality of imposing the death penalty on a defendant with intellectual disability and the adequacy of Texas’s capital sentencing procedures for considering mitigating evidence.
• B. Aguilar v. Texas
  Aguilar v. Texas is a 1964 U.S. Supreme Court decision that established a two-pronged test for evaluating the sufficiency of informants’ tips in supporting probable cause for search warrants.
• C. Miller v. Alabama
  Miller v. Alabama is a 2012 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held mandatory life-without-parole sentences for juvenile offenders unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishments.
• D. Jurek v. Texas
  Jurek v. Texas is a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld the constitutionality of Texas’s capital sentencing scheme and helped define the modern framework for death penalty procedures under the Eighth Amendment.
• E. Moore v. Texas
  Moore v. Texas is a U.S. Supreme Court case that refined the standards for determining intellectual disability in capital cases, reinforcing constitutional limits on executing individuals with such disabilities.
• F. None of above.
• G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.