ipl-logo

Case Of Daryl Renard Atkins

715 Words3 Pages

In this case, Daryl Renard Atkins is accused of the kidnapping, robbery, and murder of Eric Michael Nesbitt. Atkins was also charged with use of a firearm while committing each of these offenses ("FindLaw's United States Supreme Court case and opinions.”, 2017). On August 16, 1996, Daryl Renard Atkins and William Jones had been “drinking and smoking weed,” most of the afternoon and evening with various friends, making several trips to the local convenience store. Before the last trip, Atkins had obtained a handgun from one of the friends, they had been drinking with. When receiving the gun Atkins said, “that he wanted to use it, he would bring it back in the morning.” Atkins and Jones walk to the local convenience store again, this time they …show more content…

Nesbitt is a stranger to Atkins. After a short conversation, Nesbitt goes into the store and comes back out. Nesbitt gets in his truck to leave and Atkins Whistles to him. Nesbitt stops the truck. Atkins force his and Jones way into the truck. ” As Jones drives the truck away from the convenience store, Atkins demanded that Nesbitt surrenders his wallet. Atkins removed $60 from the wallet and was returning it to Nesbitt when he noticed a bank card inside the wallet. On Atkins' instruction, Jones drives to a branch of Crestar Bank, where Atkins forced Nesbitt to withdraw $200from the bank's drive-through automatic teller machine, using his own bank card. Atkins was holding Nesbitt at gunpoint the whole time. Atkins then gives his accomplice driving directions to an isolated area of York’s County, Virginia where Atkins shoots Nesbitt 6 times ("FindLaw's United States Supreme Court case and opinions.", …show more content…

However, both Atkins and Jones claimed the other shot Nesbitt, rather than themselves. Atkins was convicted of capital murder and related crimes by a Virginia jury and sentenced to death. Affirming, the Virginia Supreme Court relied on Penry v. Lynaugh, 492 U. S. 302, in rejecting Atkins' contention that he could not be sentenced to death because he is mentally retarded ("FindLaw's United States Supreme Court case and opinions.", 2017) The Constitutional principles this case is based on the Eight Amendment which says, Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. Therefore the question that should be asked is, Is the execution of a defendant with intellectual disabilities (mental retardation) cruel and unusual punishment prohibited by the Eighth Amendment ("FindLaw's United States Supreme Court case and opinions.",

Open Document