77-19-203.5. Successive petitions on competency of an inmate sentenced to death.

256 words·~1 min read·/ut/title-77/chapter-19/77-19-203-5

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

Effective 5/6/2026

(1)If a petition described in Section 77-19-203 is filed after an inmate has previously been found competent to be executed under this part, the court may not grant a hearing on the competency to be executed unless the successive petition:

(a)alleges with specificity a substantial change of circumstances after the previous finding of competency by the court;

(b)is sufficient to raise a significant question about the inmate's competency to be executed; and

(c)is accompanied by at least one affidavit from a licensed physician or licensed psychologist who has:

(i)examined the inmate after the previous finding of competency by the court; and

(ii)determined, in the physician's or psychologist's opinion, that the inmate is not competent to be executed due to a substantial change in circumstances.

(2)An affidavit described in Subsection (1)(c) :

(a)shall contain new and specific facts that support the opinion of the licensed physician or licensed psychologist; and

(b)does not meet the requirements of Subsection (1)(c) if any of the new facts described in Subsection (2)(a) were known to the defense before the previous finding of the court that the inmate was competent to be executed.

(3)In determining whether a successive petition involves a substantial change of circumstances under Subsection (1)(a) and raises a significant question under Subsection (1)(b) , the court may consider evidence given by the state in opposition to the petition.

Enacted by Chapter 345 , 2026 General Session