NOLEN v. STATE, 485 P.3d 829

Background:

Alton Nolen attacked coworkers at Vaughn Foods (Sept. 25, 2014), beheading Colleen Hufford and cutting Traci Johnson; he was apprehended after being shot by a company officer.
Nolen confessed, citing religious beliefs and claimed oppression; charged with first-degree malice murder (death-eligible) and multiple assault counts.
Defense pursued two pretrial competency proceedings (intellectual disability/Atkins and mental illness) and an Atkins jury trial; Dr. Russell tested Nolen (combined WASI-II/WAIS-IV) giving an IQ of 69; other experts disputed methodology and adaptive-deficit evidence.
A jury found Nolen not intellectually disabled; trial courts found him competent to stand trial despite conflicting expert opinions.
The jury convicted, found four statutory aggravators, and imposed death on Count 1; Nolen appealed raising claims including Atkins sufficiency, competency, voir dire rulings, evidentiary rulings (photos), prosecutorial misconduct, and constitutionality of aggravators.
The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the convictions and death sentence, denying relief on all asserted grounds.

Issues:

Issue	Nolen's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether evidence proved intellectual disability (Atkins)	Nolen: IQ/tests and adaptive deficits show ID; death sentence barred	State: IQ and adaptive-function evidence unreliable and insufficient; age-of-onset not shown	Jury verdict of no ID upheld; substantial evidence supports finding against Atkins claim
Competency to stand trial/enter plea	Nolen: was incompetent due to intellectual disability and/or severe mental illness; unable to assist counsel or appreciate proceedings	State: experts observed competence; refusal to cooperate was volitional, not incompetence	Trial court's findings of competence were not an abuse of discretion; competency rulings affirmed
Challenges for cause and voir dire limitations	Nolen: court erred by denying removal of certain veniremembers and by restricting questions probing jurors' views on insanity defense	State: voir dire was adequate; questioning impermissibly tested theory of defense; judge properly exercised discretion	Denials of for-cause challenges and single voir dire restriction were within trial court discretion; no reversible error
Admission of victim/scene photos and prosecutor argument	Nolen: gruesome and pre-mortem photos and certain arguments inflamed jury and were unduly prejudicial	State: photos relevant to wounds, corroboration, and statutory allowance for one in-life photo; arguments based on evidence	Photographs and challenged arguments admissible and not plain error; aggravators support death sentence; cumulative-error claim rejected

Key Cases Cited

Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002) (Eighth Amendment bars executing intellectually disabled offenders; states define enforcement criteria)
Hall v. Florida, 572 U.S. 701 (2014) (states may not adopt standards inconsistent with medical consensus; consider standard error of measurement for IQ scores)
Moore v. Texas, 137 S. Ct. 1039 (2017) (courts must rely on current medical diagnostic standards when assessing intellectual disability)
Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (1960) (competency standard: factual and rational understanding and ability to assist counsel)
Cooper v. Oklahoma, 517 U.S. 348 (1996) (due process limits on state competency procedures; standard for proving incompetence)
Wainwright v. Witt, 469 U.S. 412 (1985) (juror exclusion for cause when views prevent or substantially impair ability to follow law in capital cases)
Uttecht v. Brown, 551 U.S. 1 (2007) (trial court deference in assessing juror demeanor and equivocal voir dire answers)
Morgan v. Illinois, 504 U.S. 719 (1992) (voir dire must uncover juror bias affecting impartiality)
Murphy v. State, 54 P.3d 556 (Okla. Crim. App. 2002) (state guidance on Atkins implementation and burden)
Bosse v. State, 400 P.3d 834 (Okla. Crim. App. 2017) (admissibility and balancing of gruesome evidence; aggravator constitutionality analysis)