SB65 Alabama 2015 Session

Summary

Primary Sponsor

Hank Sanders

Democrat

Session

Regular Session 2015

Title

Capital punishment, mentally retarded defendant, procedures for court to determine, established, Sec. 13A-5-60 added

Summary

SB65 would create a formal pretrial process to determine if a capital murder defendant has mental retardation, potentially barring the death penalty.

What This Bill Does

SB65 adds a new standard to decide whether a capital murder defendant is an individual with mental retardation. The defendant must prove MR by clear and convincing evidence, using age-18 onset and adaptive functioning criteria, with IQ evidence playing a supportive, but not decisive, role. The court can hold a pretrial MR hearing, appoint a licensed psychologist for indigent defendants, and allow the state to present its own expert evidence; if MR is found, the state may not seek the death penalty. The ruling is not retroactive, not subject to interlocutory appeal, and MR findings do not bar other defenses or mitigating evidence.

Who It Affects

• Defendants charged with capital murder; they could be found not subject to the death penalty if they are determined to be an individual with mental retardation under the new standards.
• State prosecutors and defense teams in capital murder cases (including courts and experts); the state may examine the defendant with its own expert, appoint indigent defendants' psychologists, and manage pretrial hearings and evidentiary procedures that affect whether the death penalty can be pursued.

Key Provisions

• Adds Section 13A-5-60 to define 'an individual with mental retardation' as someone with significantly subaverage general intellectual functioning manifested by age 18 and significant adaptive limitations manifested by age 18 in at least two adaptive areas.
• Requires the defendant to prove MR by clear and convincing evidence, with IQ below 70 supporting an inference of MR and IQ 70 or above supporting an inference that MR may not exist; both elements and manifestation before age 18 are required for MR.
• The trial court must determine MR and issue findings; the defendant may request a pretrial MR hearing up to 90 days before trial; indigent defendants must be appointed a licensed psychologist or psychiatrist to provide evidence; the state may appoint its own examiner and present evidence.
• If the defendant cooperates, the state may obtain information via its examiner; if the defendant's lack of cooperation prevents obtaining necessary information, the court may limit the defendant's expert evidence.
• A prior state or federal determination that a defendant is MR can support an inference of MR but does not require the court to find MR.
• If MR is found, the state may not seek the death penalty; the pretrial MR determination does not bar other legal defenses or mitigating evidence; there is no interlocutory appeal of the MR ruling; the act is not retroactive to those already convicted and sentenced.
• The act is severable, and becomes effective on the first day of the third month after passage and approval.

AI-generated summary using openai/gpt-5-nano on Feb 24, 2026. May contain errors — refer to the official bill text for accuracy.

Subjects

Crimes and Offenses