# Ex Parte Perkins

> Supreme Court of Alabama · November 22, 2002 · 851 So. 2d 453

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9931738

## Case

- **Full name:** Ex Parte Roy Edward Perkins. (In Re: Roy Edward Perkins v. State of Alabama).
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Alabama
- **Decided:** November 22, 2002
- **Citations:** 851 So. 2d 453; 2002 WL 31630711
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Johnstone
- **Judges:** Johnstone, Rationale, Stuart
- **Cited by:** 128 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9931738

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- recognizing that the Legislature has not established a procedure for determining whether a capital defendant is intellectually disabled and concluding that Perkins did not “suffer from mental retardation under the definitions considered by the United States Supreme Court in re…
- holding that Perkins was not mentally retarded because, among other reasons, Perkins’s full-score adult IQ was 76

## Opinion text

But for two exceptions, which do not affect the result, I concur in the main opinion. First, in my opinion, the reason we apply the plain-error standard of review on this particular remand is that Perkins did not contend at trial that mental retardation barred the imposition of a death sentence upon him. Second, I do not necessarily join in that part of footnote 1 urging the Alabama legislature "to expeditiously develop procedures for determining whether a capital defendant is mentally retarded and thus ineligible for execution." I neither encourage nor discourage such legislation. This Court is capable of rightly resolving these issues if and when they are presented, whatever the statutory scheme may be at the time. *Page 458

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9931738. Public record. Not legal advice.