Wills v. Texas

Background

Bobby Joe Wills is a mentally retarded defendant who was 17 at the time of his offense and has an IQ of 61. He was convicted in Texas and sentenced to death after a trial in which his lawyers presented mental impairment evidence only to challenge his confession and state of mind. At the penalty stage, prosecutors told jurors not to show sympathy, and the jury answered Texas’ two sentencing questions in a way that led to a death sentence. Penry v. Lynaugh, decided while his direct appeal was pending, held that juries must be able to consider mental retardation as a reason for a lesser punishment.

Reasoning

The Court declined to review Wills’ petition for a writ of certiorari. Justice Blackmun dissented, arguing that the jury never had a chance to give mitigating effect to Wills’ mental impairment and that executing a mentally retarded juvenile would violate the Constitution. Justice O’Connor concurred in the denial on procedural grounds, noting that the key Penry claim was first raised late in the state courts and urging that the claim be pursued in state postconviction proceedings and then in federal habeas review if needed.

Real world impact

The decision leaves Wills’ death sentence intact for now and directs that his constitutional claim about jury consideration of mental disability be pursued in state and federal postconviction channels. The denial does not resolve the underlying constitutional question on the merits and could be revisited in later proceedings.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Blackmun would have granted review, vacated the sentence, and ordered resentencing; Justice O’Connor agreed the claim should be resolved in state and federal postconviction courts.