Should Atkins impact non-capital sentences for mentally retarded defendants?

This article in the Chicago Tribune, headlined “Mentally retarded Texas teen serving 100-year prison term for sex assault of boy: He admitted assaulting 7-year-old, but his retardation was not considered,” raises interesting and important questions as to whether and how mental retardation ought to limit non-capital sentencing outcomes. Here is how the article starts:

The crime Aaron Hart confessed to was undeniably repellent.  Last September, the 18-year-old man was charged with sexually assaulting a 7-year-old neighbor boy behind a tool shed in the small east Texas town of Paris.  A relative of the victim said she walked outside and saw Hart with his pants pulled down, standing next to the boy.

Police read Hart his Miranda rights and he quickly admitted his guilt.  On Feb. 11, Hart’s court-appointed attorney entered guilty pleas to each of five related felony counts, a jury recommended multiple sentences and a judge then ruled that the prison terms be served consecutively, for a total of 100 years.

That might have been the end of Cause No. 22924 in the 6th Judicial District Court of Lamar County, Texas — just another dismal criminal case on the docket of an obscure town.  Except that now, less than two months after Hart was sentenced, every court official who had a hand in the case seems to agree that he doesn’t really belong in prison for what amounts to the rest of his life.

That’s because Hart is profoundly mentally retarded.  He has an IQ of 47, and his parents say he functions at the level of a 9-year-old.  The boy he confessed to molesting is mentally retarded as well.

What’s more, the judge and the jury never heard any expert testimony about Hart’s diminished mental functioning, his capacity to understand his Miranda rights or his ability to assist in his own defense, because his defense attorney never subpoenaed any experts.

And since he has been in jail, Hart himself has been repeatedly raped, according to his parents. The first assault, allegedly by an inmate who is serving a far shorter sentence of just 8 years for sexual indecency with a child, so disturbed the alleged rapist’s mother that she called Hart’s parents to apologize.

As all Eighth Amendment fans know, the Supreme Court declared in Atkins that the Constitution prohibits states from seeking the death penalty against murderers who are mentally retarded.  This case raises the interesting and important question of whether and how Atkins ought to cross over to the non-capital sentencing universe.