Supreme Court to Hear Death Penalty Competency Arguments

The Tennessee Supreme Court has agreed to hear arguments in a post-conviction appeal filed by death row inmate Heck Van Tran who claims his execution would be unconstitutional because he is incompetent. Tran was convicted of three murders committed during the 1987 robbery of a Memphis restaurant.

In an order filed Monday, the court said oral arguments will be limited to one issue - whether a post-conviction proceeding is the proper forum for presenting a claim that Tran is not competent to be executed. Tran also has federal court appeals remaining.

In a 1986 ruling, Ford v. Wainwright, the U.S. Supreme Court said the Eighth Amendment to the federal Constitution prohibits the execution of a prisoner who is insane. Although the ruling directed states to provide a procedure for determining the sanity of death-sentenced inmates, Tennessee has no statutory mechanism in place to ensure that the required procedural rights are met.

In his post-conviction petition for relief, Tran claimed he is presently insane. The state Court of Criminal Appeals said in a February opinion that Tran is “unquestionably entitled to be heard in some forum on this issue.”

“Accordingly, we leave this matter to the determination of the Tennessee legislature and/or the Supreme Court of Tennessee,” the Court of Criminal Appeals said.