Summary
The Arkansas Supreme Court denied Andrew Engram’s motion to recall the mandate and reopen his capital-murder case to pursue a claim under Atkins v. Virginia concerning mental retardation and execution. The court held that Engram had not timely raised the issue under Arkansas’s statutory procedure, distinguished the extraordinary circumstances in Robbins v. State, and concluded that neither Rule 37 postconviction relief nor state habeas corpus provided an available remedy. Three justices dissented, reasoning that the trial court had failed to rule on a mental-retardation issue that had been raised before trial.
Holdings
- The court declined to recall its mandate or reopen Engram's case because his circumstances were materially different from the extraordinary circumstances in Robbins and he could have raised and litigated the mental-retardation issue before trial.
- Engram could not use Atkins as a basis for reopening the case because Arkansas already had a statutory procedure addressing mental retardation in capital cases, and he failed to invoke that procedure or obtain a ruling.
- The failure to obtain a ruling on Engram's mental-retardation issue did not warrant application of the first Wicks exception.
- Engram was not entitled to pursue an untimely Rule 37 petition or a new form of post-postconviction relief.
- State habeas corpus was not an appropriate avenue for Engram's Atkins-related claim.
Questions Presented
- Whether the Arkansas Supreme Court should recall its mandate and reopen Engram's capital case to permit litigation of an Atkins mental-retardation claim.
- Whether the failure to obtain a circuit-court ruling on mental retardation supported application of a Wicks exception or otherwise constituted extraordinary circumstances warranting mandate recall.
- Whether Engram could obtain additional Rule 37 postconviction relief after his appointed counsel deliberately declined to file a petition within the applicable deadline.
- Whether state habeas corpus was available to challenge Engram's death sentence.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (26)
- Engram v. State, 341 Ark. 196, 15 S.W.3d 678 (2000)(followed)
- Engram v. Arkansas, 531 U.S. 1081, 121 S. Ct. 783, 148 L. Ed. 2d 679 (2001)(followed)
- Robbins v. State, 353 Ark. 556, 114 S.W.3d 217 (2003)(distinguished)
- Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304, 122 S. Ct. 2242, 153 L. Ed. 2d 335 (2002)(applied)
- Penry v. Lynaugh, 492 U.S. 302, 109 S. Ct. 2934, 106 L. Ed. 2d 256 (1989)(applied)
- State v. Robbins, 335 Ark. 380, 985 S.W.2d 293 (1998) (per curiam)(followed)
- State v. Robbins, 336 Ark. 377, 985 S.W.2d 296 (1999) (per curiam)(followed)
- State v. Robbins, 337 Ark. 227, 987 S.W.2d 709 (1999) (per curiam)(followed)
- State v. Robbins, 339 Ark. 379, 5 S.W.3d 51 (1999)(followed)
- Robbins v. State, 342 Ark. 262, 27 S.W.3d 419 (2000)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 26.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.