ÿWPCRT ½½"[ãpQ¤æo/–*P¥¢î…³EÇøgFÝÉ©6u.ô­‚I|·¹ °ÉùKž… „™jÆÖ|£Žm3„ïÆ÷éÆÇÙ•ÖJw~ô×ÎÉ!.Ëhûíw8æg¡IG Ö%´Õ˜›²½¾EÊ{’^›b?ð’£*OÄ"6&ßü¡w*õ0çKin2¡Ø®‡Æ 9Pß¡7 ±vÇÛÌ–“™ó¢c»è‚àݱq‹Tõî =  ‡¸Â¸ækÚYí}ç0¥?s"ôÄ *‰ØÎHîNyu·x¦h÷’Ê*Dy‡¢“âV9&Õ0`¥79ˆv¡ruéëE–e›Ÿ~å¥îÉn™WĵéNUÊ‚¹†Äázj™=aXA‘„Ä8˜²¹{â–E —/¡• -鹨²¶9ˆg=ð’„8ËæäëÀÞzDÓ…q*ÞùëdžõÕ$¤ª½2A‚uñ7¼­¬!ubZðÜ&°“ŸB̾)gú{qHö,4-J-µR12‹”3é57ð9D :bM=U= 1uq@ 72æ@. A 0cFKFK¦©K©K©K©K©K©K©K©K©K©K©K©K©K©K©K©K©K©K©K©K©K©K©K©K©K©K©K©K©K 0ëOOOOOOOO B:P:P 0¤WP D3ûP D-.Q 0K[Q[Q AS¦QÆùQ 0¤¿R 0DcS A«§S˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 6ÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»„x„+s (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular8n_+°¾Ÿ ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(ÆúI Z‹(Times New Roman Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó ²Ý ƒRÂG$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôãUò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àòòSeeóó€1990€Tenn.€Pub.€Acts€ch.€1038. 2Ý ƒRÂG$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôãUò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àIndeed,€the€American€Association€for€Mental€Retardation,€(AAMR),€no€longer€uses€the€terms€ð ðmild,ððÐ ° Ðð ðmoderate,ðð€ð ðsevere,ðð€or€ð ðprofound.ðð€€òòSeeóóLyn€Entzeroth,€òòPutting€the€Mentally€Retarded€Criminal€Defendant€to€Death:Ð tÄ ÐCharting€the€Development€of€a€National€Consensus€to€Exempt€the€Mentally€Retarded€From€the€Death€Penaltyóó,€52€Ala.Ð 8ˆ ÐL.€Rev.€911,€915€(2001).€€It€has€instead€developed€a€profile€based€on€the€levels€of€support€that€a€mentally€retarded€personÐ üL Ðmay€require,€such€as€ð ðintermittent,€limited,€extensive€and€€pervasive.ðð€€òòSeeóóòòid.óó€at€915€n.41.€€ £Ý ƒRÂG$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôãUò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àÔ‡ ôãUòòôãUÔSimilarly,€the€1995€Post„Conviction€Procedures€Act€does€not€mention€mental€retardation€as€a€basisÐ ° Ðfor€reopening€a€prior€petition€for€post„conviction€relief€so€as€to€challenge€a€sentence€of€death.Ô#†ôãUòò ôãUŠ#Ô éÝ ƒRÂG$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôãUò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àAlthough€the€Court€initially€granted€certiorari€to€review€this€issue€in€òòÔ‡ôãUòòôãUÔMcCarver€v.€North€Carolinaóó,€___Ð ° ÐU.S.€___,€121€S.€Ct.€1401€(Mar.€26,€2001)€(order€granting€certiorari),€Ô#†ôãUòòôãUÖ#Ôthe€order€granting€certiorari€was€later€dismissedÐ tÄ Ðon€motion€of€òòóóthe€Attorney€General€of€North€Carolina€in€light€of€recent€North€Carolina€legislation€that€retroactivelyÐ 8ˆ Ðprohibits€execution€of€the€mentally€retardedò òó ó.€€In€spite€of€the€Supreme€Courtððs€obvious€intent€to€revisit€this€extremelyÐ üL Ðserious€and€difficult€issue€first€in€òòMcCarveróó€and€now€in€òòAtkinsóó,€the€dissent€finds€the€majorityððs€holding€in€the€present€caseÐ À Ðð ðcuriously€contrary€to€the€well€reasonedðð€decision€in€òòPenryóó. eÝ ƒRÂG$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú16Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôãUò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àòòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Hartmanóó,€42€S.W.3d€44,€59€(Tenn.€2001)€(reversing€the€defendantððs€death€sentence€in€lightÐ ° Ðof€ð ðresidual€doubtðð€evidence€not€presented€to€the€sentencing€jury;€citing€the€Capital€Juror€Project€for€the€proposition€thatÐ tÄ Ðð ðresidual€doubt€is€one€of€the€most€compelling€mitigating€circumstances€a€capital€defendant€can€establish€to€improve€hisÐ 8ˆ Ðchances€of€receiving€a€life€sentenceðð). &Ý ƒRÂG$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôãUò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àòòSeeóó2001€Ariz.€Legis.€Serv.€ch.€260€(S.B.€1551)€(West);€Ark.€Code€Ann.€ðð€5„4„618;€Colo.€Rev.€Stat.Ð ° ÐAnn.€ðð€16„9„402;€2001€Conn.€Legis.€Serv.€P.A.€01„151€(S.B.€1161)€(West);€2001€Fla.€Sess.€Law€Serv.€ch.€2001„202Ð tÄ Ð(C.S.S.B.€238€(West);€Ga.€Code€Ann.€ðð€17„7„131;€Ind.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€35„36„2„5€&€35„36„9„2,€òòet€seq.óó;€Kan.€Crim.€CodeÐ 8ˆ ÐAnn.€ðð€21„4623,€òòet€seq.óó;€Ky.€Rev.€Stat.€Ann.€ðð€532.140;€Md.€Ann.€Code€of€1957,€art.€27,€ðð€412;€2001€Mo.€Legis.€Serv.Ð üL ÐS.B.€267€(Vernonððs);€Neb.€Rev.€Stat.€ðð€28„105.01;€N.M.€Rev.€Stat.€ðð€31„20A„2.1;€N.Y.€Crim.€Proc.€Law€ðð€400.27;€2001Ð À ÐN.C.€Legis.€Serv.€S.B.€173€(West);€S.D.€Codified€Laws€€€ðð€23A„27A„26.1;€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„203;€Wash.€Rev.Ð „Ô ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€10.95.030;€òòseeóóòòalsoóó€18€U.S.C.A.€ðð€3596.€€€€€ ØØ ÑÝ ƒRÂG$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôãUò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àòòÔ‡ ôãUòòôãUÔSeeóó,€òòe.g.óó,€1994€Tenn.€Pub.€Acts€ch.€552€(ð ðThis€act€shall€take€effect€upon€becoming€a€law,€the€publicÐ ° Ðwelfare€requiring€it,€and€shall€be€retroactive€in€application€to€January€1,€1990.ðð);€1993€Tenn€Pub.€Acts€ch.€387€(ð ðThisÐ tÄ Ðact€shall€take€effect€upon€becoming€a€law,€the€public€welfare€requiring€it,€and€shall€apply€retroactively€to€any€applicableÐ 8ˆ Ðprocess,€warrant,€precept€or€summons€that€has€been€held€for€more€than€five€(5)€years.ðð).Ô#†ôãUòò ôãU#Ô(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular  ´Ý ƒRÂG$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôãUò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àDuring€the€original€trial€in€1989,€evidence€was€introduced€to€show€that€the€petitioner€had€belowÐ ° Ðaverage€intellectual€functioning,€but€no€standardized€test€was€administered,€and€there€was€no€evidence€introduced€as€toÐ tÄ Ðhis€intelligence€quotient€(ð ðI.Q.ðð). ãÝ ƒRÂG$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôãUò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àThis€statute,€which€is€now€codified€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„203€(1997),€adopted€the€nationallyÐ ° Ðaccepted€definition€of€mental€retardation.€€òòSeeóó€òòPenry€v.€Lynaughóó,€492€U.S.€302,€308€n.1,€109€S.€Ct.€2934,€2941,€n.1,€106Ð tÄ ÐL.€Ed.€2d€256€(1989)€(ð ðPersons€who€are€mentally€retarded€are€described€as€having€ððsignificantly€subaverage€generalÐ 8ˆ Ðintellectual€functioning€existing€concurrently€with€deficits€in€adaptive€behavior€and€manifested€during€the€developmentalÐ üL Ðperiod.ðð€€American€Association€on€Mental€Deficiency€(now€Retardation)€(AAMR),€Classification€in€Mental€RetardationÐ À Ð1€(H.€Grossman€ed.€1983)).€€To€be€classified€as€mentally€retarded,€a€person€generally€must€have€an€IQ€of€70€or€below.€Ð „Ô ÐòòId.óó,€at€11.ðð). 6Ý ƒRÂG$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôãUò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àTwo€of€the€death€sentences€were€remanded€for€resentencing€on€the€basis€that€the€evidence€wasÐ ° Ðinsufficient€to€establish€one€of€the€aggravating€circumstances€relied€upon€by€State€and€that€the€error€was€not€harmlessÐ tÄ Ðbeyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòState€v.€Van€Tranóó,€864€S.W.2d€at€480.€On€remand€the€petitioner€received€two€concurrentÐ 8ˆ Ðlife€sentences€for€these€offenses. PÝ ƒRÂG$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôãUò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àThe€DSM„IV€is€the€treatise€referred€to€and€relied€upon€in€the€mental€health€field€for€the€discussion€andÐ ° Ðdiagnosis€of€mental€disorders.€We€refer€to€it€for€the€purpose€of€providing€insight€and€background€into€mental€retardationÐ tÄ Ðand€not€for€the€purpose€of€expanding€upon€or€interpreting€the€statutory€definition€in€Tennessee.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€893Ð 8ˆ ÐS.W.2d€908€(Tenn.€1994)ò ò.€€ó ó€(ÆúI Z‹&Times New Roman Ñ ° Ñ þÝ ƒRÂG$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôãUò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àòòSeeóó2001€Ariz.€Legis.€Serv.€ch.€260€(S.B.€1551)€(West);€Ark.€Code€Ann.€ðð€5„4„618;€Colo.€Rev.€Stat.Ð ° ÐAnn.€ðð€16„9„402;€2001€Conn.€Legis.€Serv.€P.A.€01„151€(S.B.€1161)€(West);€2001€Fla.€Sess.€Law€Serv.€ch.€2001„202Ð tÄ Ð(C.S.S.B.€238)€(West);€Ga.€Code€Ann.€ðð€17„7„131;€Ind.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€35„36„2„5€&€35„36„9„2,€òòet€seq.óó;€Kan.€Crim.€CodeÐ 8ˆ ÐAnn.€ðð€21„4623,€òòet€seq.óó;€Ky.€Rev.€Stat.€Ann.€ðð€532.140;€Md.€Ann.€Code€of€1957,€art.€27,€ðð€412;€2001€Mo.€Legis.€Serv.Ð üL ÐS.B.€267€(Vernonððs);€Neb.€Rev.€Stat.€ðð€28„105.01;€N.M.€Rev.€Stat.€ðð€31„20A„2.1;€N.Y.€Crim.€Proc.€Law€ðð€400.27;€2001Ð À ÐN.C.€Legis.€Serv.€S.B.€173€(West);€S.D.€Codified€Laws€ðð€23A„27A„26.1;€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„203;€Wash.€Rev.Ð „Ô ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€10.95.030.€€€€€€€€€ «Ý ƒRÂG$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôãUò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àòòSeeóó€18€U.S.C.A.€ðð€3596. ƒÝ ƒRÂG$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú20Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôãUò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àAs€we€have€noted,€109€elected€representatives€of€the€people€of€Tennessee€voted€in€favor€of€the€statuteÐ ° Ðprohibiting€the€execution€of€the€mentally€retarded,€òòseeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð39„13„203€(1991),€and€6€voted€against€it.€ Ý ƒRÂG$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú22Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôãUò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àIn€contrast,€as€we€will€discuss,€òòinfraóó,€the€remedy€applied€by€the€majority€will€require€the€trial€court€andÐ ° Ðnot€this€Court€to€make€the€pertinent€factual€findings€regarding€the€petitionerððs€alleged€mental€retardation.€ ßÝ ƒRÂG$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú21Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôãUò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àWe€believe€that€reliance€on€the€rationale€of€the€òòPenryóó€dissent€is€particularly€appropriate€in€light€of€theÐ ° Ðfact€that€the€Tennessee€legislatureððs€enactment€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„203€(1991)€was,€in€effect,€a€directÐ tÄ Ðrepudiation€of€the€òòPenryóó€majority€decision.Ð 8ˆ Ð Ý ƒRÂG$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôãUò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àòòÔ‡ôãUòòôãUÔSeeóó,€òòe.g.óó,€òòFletcher€v.€State,óó€951€S.W.2d€378€(Tenn.€1997)€(holding€that€this€Court€has€authority€toÐ ° Ðreview€an€appeal€from€the€denial€of€a€motion€to€reopen€despite€the€absence€of€a€statutory€provision€governing€suchÐ tÄ Ðreview€by€the€Supreme€Court).òòò òÔ#†ôãUòòôãUŽ#Ôó óóó æÝ ƒRÂG$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú19Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôãUò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àòòTennessee€Dept.€of€Mental€Health€v.€Allisonóó,€833€S.W.2d€82,€85€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1992). :Ý ƒRÂG$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôãUò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àò òòòóóó óAlthough€not€raised€in€briefing€by€the€State,€the€dissent€cites€the€doctrine€of€waiver€and€this€CourtððsÐ ° Ðdecision€in€òòWest€v.€Stateóó,€19€S.W.3d€753€(Tenn.€2000),€which€held€that€the€plain€error€doctrine€is€not€applicable€in€post„Ð tÄ Ðconviction.€€This€Court€has€never€discussed€the€applicability€of€these€doctrines€in€the€context€of€a€motion€to€reopen,Ð 8ˆ Ðwhich€by€definition€€must€be€founded€upon€a€new€legal€issue€or€newly€discovered€scientific€evidence€of€actual€innocence.€Ð üL ÐMoreover,€the€Court€has€never€discussed€the€applicability€of€these€doctrines€under€circumstances€similar€to€this€case.- ù- Ý ƒRÂG$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôãUò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àThe€dissentððs€assertion€that€we€have€cited€no€authority€in€our€analysis€is€plainly€incorrect.€€We€relyÐ ° Ðupon€the€well„established€analysis€of€article€I,€ðð€16€as€set€forth€in€òòState€v.€Blackóó,€815€S.W.2d€at€189.€€We€also€rely€uponÐ tÄ Ðthe€definition€of€mental€retardation€accepted€both€nationally€and€in€Tennessee.€€We€have€cited€no€Tennessee€case€lawÐ 8ˆ Ðwhich€holds€that€it€is€unconstitutional€to€execute€the€mentally€retarded€because€none€exists.€€Indeed,€one€of€theÐ üL Ðfundamental€roles€of€this€Court€is€often€to€confront€and€to€determine€issues€of€first€impression.3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)0i) $ Ý ƒRÂG$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú17Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôãUò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àIndeed,€the€majority€in€òòPenryóó€cited€several€public€opinion€polls€including€a€Texas€poll€in€which€73%Ð ° Ðopposed€the€death€penalty€for€mentally€retarded€persons,€a€Florida€poll€in€which€71%€opposed€the€death€penalty€forÐ tÄ Ðmentally€retarded€persons,€and€a€Georgia€poll€in€which€66%€opposed€the€penalty€for€mentally€retarded€persons.€€òòPenryóó,Ð 8ˆ Ð492€U.S.€at€334„35,€109€S.€Ct.€at€2955.€€As€also€noted€by€one€commentator:Ð üL ÐÌà8  àà ` àA€large€number€of€polls€.€.€.€reveal€a€striking€consistency€in€opposition€to€executing€theÐ „Ô Ðmentally€retarded.€.€.€.€€[A]1988€Harris€poll€measured€opposition€to€this€practice€among€three€ethnicÐ H ˜ Ðsubsamples,€including€2008€Caucasians€(70.10%€opposed);€1005€African„Americans€(81.60%Ð  \ Ðopposed);€and€100€Asian„Americans€(78.10%€opposed).ÐÐ Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àPolls€.€.€.€taken€before€and€after€the€òòPenryóó€decision€also€demonstrate€public€rejection€of€theÐ X ¨  Ðpractice.€€In€the€1987€Nebraska€Annual€Social€Indicators€Survey€conducted€by€the€University€ofÐ  l  ÐNebraskaððs€Bureau€of€Sociological€Research,€67.5%€of€428€respondents€opposed€the€death€penaltyÐ à 0  Ðin€cases€where€the€defendant€was€mentally€retarded.€€In€an€October€1988€poll€of€463€AlabamaÐ ¤ô  Ðresidents€eighteen€years€or€older,€71.30%€of€respondents€opposed€the€death€penalty€in€cases€involvingÐ h¸  Ðthe€mentally€retarded.€€A€December€1989€poll€of€California€residents€eighteen€years€or€older€foundÐ ,|  Ð71.60%€of€the€448€respondents€agreed€that€it€was€ð ðnot€all€rightðð€to€inflict€capital€punishment€on€theÐ ð@  Ðmentally€retarded.€€A€recent€article€collecting€polling€data€from€several€other€states€also€demonstratedÐ ´  Ðsubstantial€.€.€.€opposition€to€executing€mentally€retarded€prisoners€in€Connecticut€(84%),€GeorgiaÐ xÈ  Ð(66%),€Indiana€(74%),€Kentucky€(57%),€Louisiana€(78%),€Maryland€(82%),€New€York€(82%),Ð <Œ ÐOklahoma€(61%),€South€Carolina€(56%),€Texas€(73/45.4%),€and€Virginia€(39%).ÐPÐ Ð  ÐÌòòóóBryan€Lester€Dupler,€òòAnother€Look€at€Evolving€Standards:€Will€Decency€Prevail€Against€Executing€the€MentallyÐ ˆØ ÐRetarded€?óó,€52€Okla.€L.€Rev.€593,€601„02€(1999).€(;3£$´´Ô2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à œÝ ƒRÂG$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú18Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôãUò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àAlthough€comparisons€to€a€mentally€retarded€adultððs€ð ðmental€ageðð€are€necessarily€imprecise,€it€is€clearÐ ° Ðthat€the€intellectual€and€adaptive€impairments€of€mentally€retarded€adults€result€in€a€reduced€ability€to€cope€with€andÐ tÄ Ðfunction€in€the€everyday€world.€€òòÔ_ÔPenryÔ_Ô€v.€Lynaughóó,€492€U.S.€at€346,€109€S.€Ct.€at€2961€(Brennan,€J.,€concurring€andÐ 8ˆ Ðdissenting).€We€therefore€believe€that€legislative€enactments€similar€to€Tennesseeððs€that€prohibit€the€execution€of€minorsÐ üL Ðmay€also€be€seen€as€relevant€to€the€societal€view€opposing€execution€of€the€mentally€retarded.€€òòSeeóóòòThompson€v.Ð À ÐOklahomaóó,€487€U.S.€at€828,€108€S.€Ct.€at€2695.€€(|G2ÂG$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€E-»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôãUò»»Ô d(|3w$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€E-»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3w$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€E-»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€E-»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼E-»»»ÔÑ8€XXdì»»d8ÑÔ€ ¼E-»»¼E-ÔÑ€W-ÑÑ pXÑò òÔ‡ XX» ¼E-ÔòòÑ€%OYÑà@™ ™ ìàóóó óÔ#† ¼E-»X X;#Ôà@@™ ™ ìàÔ‡ îöî» ¼E-ÔIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@õõ%ìàAT€JACKSONÔ#† ¼E-»î îö»#ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓApril€4,€2001€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡ XX» ¼E-ÔÌò òÔ#† ¼E-»X Xœ#ÔHECK€VAN€Ô_ÔTRANÔ_Ô€v.€STATE€OF€TENNESSEEÔ‡ XX» ¼E-Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌò ò€Appeal€by€permission€from€the€Court€of€Criminal€AppealsÐ ú J ÐCriminal€Court€for€Shelby€CountyÐ æ 6 Ðà@@øøìàNo.€P„14409€€€€John€P.€Ô_ÔColtonÔ_Ô,€JudgeÐ Ò " ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<•` AßÐ –æ  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€W2000„00739„SC„R11„Ô_ÔPDÔ_Ô€„€Filed€December€4,€Ô_Ô2001Ô_ÔÐ ‘á  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<h` AßÐ i¹  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÔ#† ¼E-»X X%#ÔÔ€ XX» ¼E-Ôà  àWe€granted€this€appeal€to€determine€whether€the€trial€court€and€the€Court€of€CriminalÐ d´ ÐAppeals€erred€by€denying€the€petitionerððs€motion€to€reopen€his€post„conviction€petition.€€In€hisÐ P  Ðmotion,€the€petitioner€asserted€that€new€evidence€establishes€that€he€is€mentally€retarded€and,Ð <Œ Ðtherefore,€ineligible€for€the€death€penalty€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„203,€which€prohibits€theÐ (x Ðexecution€of€the€mentally€retarded.€€The€petitioner€also€argued€on€appealò ò€ó óthat€the€Eighth€AmendmentÐ d Ðto€the€United€States€Constitution€and€article€I,€ðð€16€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution€prohibit€theÐ T Ðexecution€of€mentally€retarded€individuals.€€Ð ð@ ÐÌà  àAfter€careful€consideration,€we€conclude€that€the€General€Assembly€did€not€clearly€intendÐ È Ðto€apply€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„203€retroactively€and€that€the€statute€therefore€provides€no€basisÐ ´ Ðto€reopen€a€post„conviction€suit€for€a€petitioner€who€was€sentenced€before€its€effective€date.€€We€alsoÐ  ð Ðconclude,€however,€that€the€Eighth€Amendment€to€the€United€States€Constitution€and€òòò òó óóóarticle€I,€ðð€16Ð ŒÜ Ðof€the€Tennessee€Constitution€prohibit€the€execution€of€mentally€retarded€individuals€because€suchÐ xÈ Ðexecutions€violate€evolving€standards€of€decency€that€mark€the€progress€of€a€maturing€society,€areÐ d´ Ðgrossly€disproportionate,€and€serve€no€valid€Ô_ÔpenologicalÔ_Ô€purpose€in€any€case.€€We€therefore€reverseÐ P   Ðthe€judgment€of€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€and€remand€the€case€to€the€trial€court€for€furtherÐ