Court Opinion

ID: 9505438
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 20:04:50.630336+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:04:28.095810
License: Public Domain

RUCKER, Justice,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent because I do not believe a sentence of death is appropriate for a person suffering a severe mental illness. Recently the Supreme Court held that the executions of mentally retarded criminals are “cruel and unusual punishments” prohibited by the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution. Atkins v. Virginia, — U.S. -, 122 S.Ct. 2242, 2252, 153 L.Ed.2d 335 (2002). There has been no argument in this case that Corcoran is mentally retarded.1 However, the underlying rationale for prohibiting executions of the mentally retarded is just as compelling for prohibiting executions of the seriously mentally ill, namely evolving standards of decency.
In that regard I associate myself with the dissenting opinion of Justice Pfeifer of the Ohio Supreme Court who noted:
*503Mental illness is a medical disease. Every year we learn more about it and the way it manifests itself in the mind of the sufferer. At this time, we do not and cannot know what is going on in-the mind of a person with mental illness. As a society, we have always treated those with mental illness differently from those without. In the interest of human dignity, we must continue to do so.... I believe that executing a convict with a severe mental illness is a cruel. and unusual punishment.
Ohio v. Scott, 92 Ohio St.3d 1, 748 N.E.2d 11, 20 (2001) (Pfeifer, J., dissenting), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 1034, 121 S.Ct. 1996, 149 L.Ed.2d 780 (2001). Addressing the federal constitutional claim the Supreme Court noted, “pursuant to our narrowing jurisprudence, which seeks to ensure that only the most deserving of execution are put to death, an exclusion for the mentally retarded is appropriate.” Atkins, — U.S. at -, 122 S.Ct. at 2251. Apart from the federal constitution, Indiana has its own constitutional provision against cruel and unusual punishment.2 Because Indiana’s constitution affords even greater protection than its federal counterpart, I would hold that a seriously mentally ill person is not among those most deserving to be put to death. To do so in my view violates the Cruel and Unusual Punishment provision of the Indiana Constitution. Because Cor-coran is obviously severely mentally ill, he should be sentenced to life without the possibility of parole, not death.

. By statute, Indiana prohibits the execution of the mentally retarded. See Ind.Code § 35-36-9-6.

. See Ind. Const, art. I, § 16 (providing "Excessive bail shall not be required. Excessive fines shall not be imposed. Cruel and unusual punishments shall not be inflicted. All penalties shall be proportioned to the nature of the offense.”).