Summary
In Atkins, the Supreme Court recognized "that a national consensus has developed against" executing the mentally retarded.
Summary of this case from Conner v. HallOpinion
OCTOBER 1, 2001
No. 00-1842 STATOIL ASA v. HEEREMAC V.O.F. ET AL. C.A. 5th Cir.
No. 00-1860 MEMORIAL HOSPITALS ASSN. v. HUMPHREY. C.A. 9th Cir.; and
No. 00-1926 AMERICAN INSURANCE ASSN. ET AL. v. LOW, COMMISSIONER OF INSURANCE OF CALIFORNIA. C.A. 9th Cir. The Solicitor General is invited to file briefs in these cases expressing the views of the United States.
No. 00-8452 ATKINS v. VIRGINIA. Sup.Ct. Va. [Certiorari granted, 533 U.S. 976.] Order entered September 25, 2001, is amended as follows: Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari granted limited to the following question: "Whether the execution of mentally retarded individuals convicted of capital crimes violates the Eighth Amendment?"
No. 00-9054 COREY v. MENDEL ET AL. C.A. D.C. Cir. Motion of petitioner for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis [ 532 U.S. 1036.] denied.
No. 00-9491 JOHNSON v. WYOMING. Dist. Ct. Wyo., Laramie County. Motion of petitioner for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis [ 533 U.S. 1036] denied.
No. 00-10065 ANDERSON v. UNITED STATES. C.A. Fed. Cir. Motion of petitioner for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis [ 533 U.S. 926] denied.
No. 00-9280 KELLY v. SOUTH CAROLINA. Sup.Ct. S.C. [Certiorari granted, 533 U.S. 928.] Motion of appointment of counsel granted, and it is ordered that David I. Bruck, Esq., of Columbia, S.C., be appointed to serve as counsel for petitioner in this case.
No. 00-9285 MICKENS v. TAYLOR, WARDEN. C.A. 4th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 532 U.S. 970.] Motion of Legal Ethicists et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae granted. Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument granted.
No. 00-9939 MATTHEWS v. SPALDING, DIRECTOR, IDAHO DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS. C.A. 9th Cir.;
No. 00-10003 ZHANG v. ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY ET AL. C.A. 9th Cir.;