By Liz Sidoti
The Associated Press

COLUMBUS - The Ohio Supreme Court ordered a trial judge Wednesday to determine whether a convicted killer's execution would be unconstitutional, in a case that sets guidelines for how the state deals with claims of mental retardation by death row inmates.

The court ruled unanimously thatattorneys for prisoner Gregory Lott should have the chance to present additional evidence Mr. Lott's IQ is low enough to deem him mentally retarded.

"Whether Lott is mentally retarded is a disputed factual issue, which we believe is best resolved in the trial court," the court said.

The court had postponed Mr. Lott's Aug. 27 execution, for killing an East Cleveland man in 1986, to use the case to define mental retardation and establish procedures for determining whether a death row inmate is mentally retarded.

The U.S. Supreme Court, ruling in June, said execution in those cases was cruel and unusual punishment, but the justices left it up to states to determine how to come to that conclusion. Since then, the 20 states, including Ohio, that did not explicitly prohibit the execution of mentally retarded inmates have worked to set definitions and procedures for appeals.

Mr. Lott, 41, is among at least 12 death row inmates in Ohio who have appealed their sentences based on claims of mental retardation.

The state Supreme Court said that a trial judge - not a jury - will determine whether a person is mentally retarded.

Joe Case, a spokesman for Attorney General Betty Montgomery, said the ruling fulfilled everything the state had sought.