The ABA Journal reported that earlier in November 2017, the US Supreme Court affirmed an Alabama inmate sentence to execution in a case named Dunn v. Madison. The issue at hand is the fact that the inmate has suffered several strokes during his time in prison which resulted in him forgetting the crime he committed. Precedence, an earlier legal action used as a guide, is being used for this case in that mental capacity does not affect the decision of executing someone.
In 1985, Madison, the Alabama inmate of the current case, killed a police officer and was sentenced to death. A psychologist was hired by Madison’s lawyer where he explained that Madison knows he is being executed for murder but does not recall the crime nor the trial. In 2016, Madison pursued suspending his death sentence due to forgetting his crime along with other medical issues such as becoming legally blind, inability to walk independently, slurred speech, and vascular dementia. His efforts failed as two previous Supreme Court cases were used as precedent ruling Madison does not have a mental illness if he understands he is being punished for his crime through execution. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the ruling stating that since Madison doesn’t recall his crime, he cannot fully understand both the crime and execution. The Supreme Court disagreed by clarifying that there is a difference between failing to remember the crime from failing to rationally comprehend the crime and sentence.
This debate concerns people in death row which can lead to more cases involving prisoner executions because of old age and various diseases. This case is also questioning the severity of the death penalty due to the length of prison time between death sentence and the actual execution. Dunn v. Madison brings a call for a review of the constitutionality of the death penalty as indicated by Justices Breyer, Ginsburg, and Sotomayor. Thank you Bhavini Mistry for your research in this article.