The Missouri Supreme Court overturned a death penalty sentence for man who is mentally retarded. Andrew Lyons, 52, was convicted of first-degree murder in 1996 and sentenced to death for the 1992 killing of his estranged girlfriend.

Lyons filed a petition in mandamus, claiming to be mentally retarded and therefore ineligible to be executed.

A court-appointed master supported Lyons' claims. The master concluded that Lyons' IQ was in a range of 61 to 70, that Lyons had continual extensive related deficits in two adaptive behaviors, and that the symptoms were present and documented before Lyons had turned 18.

"Although there is evidence, as noted earlier, that Lyons manifested these conditions before age 18, the state contends there was insufficient documentation of these conditions," the court wrote in a unanimous opinion.

"The state vigorously notes the lack of an IQ test result from prior to age 18 and the scant school records and other evidence with respect to the adaptive behaviors.

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the death sentence of an Alabama man who claimed his attorneys failed to present key evidence of his borderline mental retardation. The justices said the defense made a strategic decision, not a negligent omission.

Holly Wood shot and killed his ex-girlfriend as she slept in her Troy, Ala., home in 1993. Wood lost his appeal in state court, but won habeas relief in federal court. The district court criticized the defense for putting an inexperienced attorney in charge of the penalty phase. According to the federal judge, the state court's holdings constituted "an unreasonable application of federal law."

It ordered the state to either resentence Wood to life without parole or conduct a new sentencing hearing.The Supreme Court upheld the 11th Circuit's reversal, saying it wasn't "unreasonable" to conclude that Wood's attorneys had made a strategic decision not to introduce evidence of Wood's mental deficiencies.
   
"Most of the evidence Wood highlights ... speaks not to whether counsel made a strategic decision, but rather to whether counsel's judgment was reasonable - a question we do not reach," Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote for the 7-2 majority.

The end was almost certainly worse than what Kwame Kilpatrick expected.

Grilled for six days on the witness stand -- his integrity questioned by prosecutors who said that if they couldn't send him to jail, they'd settle for $225,000 -- Kilpatrick's restitution hearing ended after four months Wednesday with a judge calling him a liar and demanding he cut a check for far more than even prosecutors expected.

"You have not been credible in this courtroom and you, again, have not been honest to the City of Detroit," Wayne County Circuit Judge David Groner told Kilpatrick, who sat stone-faced. "The court finds the defendant's conduct in this matter reprehensible."

Compounding the former mayor's woes was news that broke just as he arrived at court: His longtime friend and ex-mayoral aide, DeDan Milton, had been indicted on federal bribery and extortion charges, another indication the feds are tightening focus on Kilpatrick.

A federal judge has opted not to impose a finding of prosecutorial misconduct on Justice Department lawyers for their handling of a case against Blackwater security guards involved in a 2007 shooting in Baghdad.

In Federal District Court here last month, Judge Ricardo M. Urbina threw out all charges against the five involved in the shootings, which left 17 Iraqis dead and about 20 wounded.

In that decision, Judge Urbina wrote that in a “reckless violation of the defendants’ constitutional rights,” investigators, prosecutors and government witnesses had inappropriately relied on statements the guards had been compelled to make in debriefings by the State Department shortly after the shootings. The State Department had hired the guards to protect its officials.