Will Atkins ultimately prevail with his Atkins claim?

As detailed in posts here and here, a jury last year concluded that Daryl Atkins — the defendant at the center of the Supreme Court's ruling in Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002), that the Eighth Amendment prohibits executing mentally retarded offenders — was not mentally retarded.  As a result of this ruling, Atkins was still constitutionally eligible to have his death sentence carried out.

Later this week, as detailed in this article, the Virginia Supreme Court will consider Daryl Atkins' Atkins claim.  The article discusses the conflicting evidence concerning Daryl Atkins' mental status, though I am also intrigued by whether it was appropriate for Virginia to require him to prove his mental retardation by a preponderance of the evidence.

Some prior related posts:

• Will Atkins get the benefit of Atkins?
• Atkins does not get the benefit of Atkins
• When Atkins meets Blakely in Apprendi-land
• SCOTUS speaks to Atkins capital procedures