1. Capital Procedure/ Severe Mental Disability An Act to Amend the Capital Trial, Sentencing, and Post-Conviction Procedures for persons with Severe Mental Disability

2. State and Federal laws consistently recognize that people with less capacity to control their behavior due to serious mental illness should not be subject to the same sanctions as people without such disabilities.

3. Despite safeguards designed to prevent the execution of a defendant who is insane, there are prisoners on death row who have severe mental disabilities

4. In recent years, a national effort has begun to address concerns regarding the execution of persons with severe mental disability

5. The national debate about the fairness of imposing the death penalty on defendants with severe mental disability is escalating

6. National Organizations Supporting the effort to prohibit the execution of persons with severe mental illness National Alliance on Mental Illness The American Psychiatric Association American Psychological Association American Bar Association

7. Mental Health Association NAMI- North Carolina Chapter North Carolina Psychological Association North Carolina Psychiatric Association Council of Churches NASW- North Carolina Chapter Local Groups Supporting Proposed Bill

8. The capital trial, sentencing, and appeal/post- conviction process in North Carolina does not offer adequate protection for persons with serious mental disability

9. Current Procedure Two-part trial for capital cases Guilt / innocence phase Sentencing Phase

10. Current Capital Case Procedure

11. Currently, our criminal justice system has obstacles to providing fair treatment to people with severe mental illness Because of their impairments, people with mental illness often: Undermine their own defense Or are unable to cooperate or assist their attorneys Defendants insist on representing themselves without assistance of attorney Waiver of appeals Juries often perceive mental illness as aggravating, not mitigating

12. Political considerations and public misperceptions about mental disability have hindered a fair and reasonable resolution to this problem

13. This proposed legislation balances the state’s interest in public safety, and deterrence with an understanding of mental illness, its effect on individual behavior, and the particular needs of those with mental disabilities

14. Why Change is needed Add layers of legal protection for the seriously mentally ill Save the State hundred of thousands of dollars by avoiding unnecessary trials Save time and resources in our over- burdened court system

15. Proposed Change to Capital Trial Procedures

16. Atkins v. Virginia The US Supreme Court recognized that a criminal defendant’s mental retardation often impedes a fair determination of a defendant’s guilt and sentence, because they are not able to assist in their defense, may appear frightening to jurors due to their mental retardation, they are more likely to be wrongfully convicted.

17. US Supreme Court The severity of the appropriate punishment necessarily depends on the culpability of the offender

18. Supreme Court Justice Lewis Powell recognized The death penalty has little deterrent force against defendants who have reduced capacity for considered choice.

19. Retribution and deterrence are the two primary justifications recognized by the US Supreme Court for applying the death penalty… Neither is furthered by executing defendants with severe mental illness

20. “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” -Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.