The case of Dunn v. Madison revolved around the issue of whether a death row inmate, Vernon Madison, was competent enough to be executed for his crimes. Madison had been convicted and sentenced to death in Alabama for killing a police officer in 1985 but developed vascular dementia after several strokes while on death row which led him to forget committing the crime he was convicted for. The Supreme Court ruled that despite not remembering his crime, it did not mean he wasn't aware of why he's being punished or what punishment is about to be imposed upon him - thus making him eligible for execution under U.S law. This ruling upheld an earlier decision by Alabama state courts who also deemed Madison fit enough to face capital punishment.

In the case of Dunn v. Madison, there was no formal dissenting opinion issued by any of the Supreme Court justices. The per curiam decision, which is a ruling issued in the name of an entire court rather than specific judges, affirmed that Vernon Madison was competent to be executed despite his claims of memory loss due to several strokes. This decision upheld previous rulings stating that as long as a defendant understands why they are being punished and can rationally understand it, then they are eligible for execution regardless of their physical or mental health status.