The New Jersey Supreme Court held Monday that a defendant may not receive the death penalty if one juror finds that he or she is mentally retarded. The public defender’s office contended that Porfirio Jimenez, an inmate charged with the kidnapping, murder and sexual assault of a ten year old boy, was mentally retarded with an IQ of 68. Prosecutors argued that a unanimous jury had to find that the defendant is mentally retarded in order to bar the death penalty.
The court held that ”[b]ecause the finding of mental retardation is like a dispositive mitigating factor, we hold that if a single juror finds defendant has met his burden of proving mental retardation by a preponderance of the evidence, defendant is not eligible to receive a penalty of death.” The court also held that the issue of retardation should be decided during the penalty phase proceeding to allow a defendant several opportunities to present evidence regarding mental retardation. The court’s ruling did not address whether the prosecution can instruct the jury regarding the impact of issuing a non-unanimous verdict.
The New Jersey Legislature imposed a moratorium on executions in 2005 and is currently considering bills to abolish the death penalty.
The case is State v. Jimenez, A-75-2006. Source: http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1182194747789&pos=ataglance
