The death penalty was introduced to America in the 17th century. As of January 1, 2011, more than three thousand people had been sentenced to death in the United States (Death Penalty Information Center). There are currently thirty-four states with the death penalty, and to date 1,272 inmates have been executed (Death Penalty Information Center). A number of inmates may have been on death row for more than a decade. Growing public support for the death penalty and increasing numbers of executions indicate that a jurisdictional problem exists (Bonnie, 1990). As a result, “many states began to encounter convicts claiming that their prolonged detention under penalty of death had left them mentally incompetent (Small and Otto, 1991).” These death row inmates live knowing that their death is approaching and some of them are often mentally incapable. Yet many death penalty jurisdictions have allowed provisions exempting mentally incompetent people from execution. U.S. law recognizes other grounds for exclusion, including issues related to retaliation, ability to provide information for the appeals process, and ability to psychologically prepare for death (Brodsky et al., 1999 ). Although these exclusions are in place, it remains necessary to assess an inmate's competency. According to the ABA, the standard for incompetence is that an inmate can be found incompetent if he suffers from mental illness or mental retardation, if he cannot understand its nature. of the current procedure, the reason for which he was tried, the reason for the sentence or the nature of the sentence (Ebert, 2001). Thus, the intellectual functioning of an inmate must be assessed...... middle of document ...... preventing the execution of mental retardation, 53 CASE W.RES. L. REV. 171, 171-72. Otto, R.K. and Small, M.A. (1991). Skills assessments to be performed. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 18, 146-158. Tobolowsky, P. (2007). To Panetti and Beyond the definition and identification of capital offenders who are too "crazy" to be executed. American Journal of Criminal Law. Weinstock, R., Leong, GB and Silva, J. (2010). Competence to perform: A post Panetti ethical analysis. Behavioral Sciences and Law, 28(5), 690-706. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.gsu.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=psyh&AN=2010-23176-008&site=ehost-liveZAPF, PA ( 2009). Elucidating the contours of competence for execution: Ford and Panetti's implications for assessment. Journal of Psychiatry and Law, 37(2/3), 269-307. Taken from EBSCOhost.