Black v. Tennessee
No. M2004-01345-CCA-R3-PD, slip op., 2005 WL 2662577 (Tenn. Crim. App.
2005)
Black was convicted of three counts of first degree murder and the jury
sentenced him to death. On appeal, argued that he was ineligible for the
death penalty due to mental retardation, under Atkins v. Virginia,
536
U.S. 304 (2002). Black's experts testified that his mental retardation
was largely due to prenatal exposure to alcohol, but may have had other
causes, as well, including lead exposure and head trauma from football
injuries. The conclusions of the experts were based in part on brain
imaging, including MRI and PET scans.
Tennessee law defines mental retardation by the presence of three
factors:
(1) sub-average intellectual functioning, evidenced by and IQ of 70 or
below, (2) deficits in adaptive behavior, and (3) manifestation of the
mental retardation by the age of 18.
Based on the evidence presented (including the fact that IQ tests
administered to Black prior to the age of 18 all resulted in scores above
70; his score declined in later years), the court concluded that Black did
not meet the third prong of Tennessee's definition of mental retardation.
As regards Black's prenatal exposure to alcohol, his sister testified
that
their mother drank alcohol during pregnancy, but the court noted that she
"did not...testify as to the amount her mother drank while she was
pregnant"
(perhaps reflecting a mistaken impression that a certain level of alcohol
exposure is required to result in damage or diagnosis). The court further
noted that "it cannot be determined with certainty that the ingestion of
alcohol during pregnancy will cause mental retardation." (It is not clear
whether, if the court were convinced that Black's mental retardation was a
result of his prenatal exposure to alcohol, that would have affected its
conclusion as to whether his mental retardation manifested before he
reached the age of 18.)
The court's opinion was based strictly on the state's statutory
definition of mental retardation, and does not indicate whether FAS was
otherwise presented as a mitigating factor during sentencing.