Penry v. Lynaugh
Significance, Supreme Court Finds Application Of Capital Punishment To The Mentally Retarded Constitutional, Impact, Further Readings
Johnny Paul Penry
James A. Lynaugh, Director, Texas Department of Corrections
That execution of the mentally retarded violates the Eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
Curtis C. Mason
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
Charles A. Palmer
Justices for the Court
Anthony M. Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor (writing for the Court), William H. Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia, Byron R. White,
Harry A. Blackmun, William J. Brennan, Jr., Thurgood Marshall, John Paul Stevens
Date of Decision
26 June 1989
The Supreme Court reversed Penry's death sentence.
- Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153 (1976).
- Ford v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 399 (1986).
- Thompson v. Oklahoma, 487 U.S. 815 (1988).
- Stanford v. Kentucky, 492 U.S. 361 (1989).
- Pete Rose Trial: 1990 - Some Losses Greater Than Winnings, Suggestions For Further Reading
- Pennsylvania v. Muniz - Significance, Exception From Miranda's Coverage, Exceptions Undermine Miranda, Impact
- Penry v. Lynaugh - Further Readings
- Penry v. Lynaugh - Significance
- Penry v. Lynaugh - Supreme Court Finds Application Of Capital Punishment To The Mentally Retarded Constitutional
- Penry v. Lynaugh - Impact
- Other Free Encyclopedias