CALL 205.538.3340

The Law Office of J.D. Lloyd Logo Because There’s Hope After the Trial


After The Trial Blog

The After The Trial blog presents insights on ongoing and recent trials around the state of Alabama, including weekly criminal law round-ups.

Supreme Court Update - New Protections Against Executing The Mentally Disabled

J.D. Lloyd - Thursday, March 30, 2017


Moore v. Texas (U.S. Supreme Court, March 28/2017)


Moore was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death. In post-trial proceedings, a circuit court concluded that Mr. Moore was intellectually disabled and, thus, ineligible for execution under Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002) and Hall v. Florida, 572 U.S. ___ (2014). The circuit court based its decision on the most current medical guidelines. However, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (“CCA”) rejected that conclusion and re-instated Moore’s death sentence. The CCA concluded that the circuit court erred in not following factors laid out in Ex parte Briseno, 135 S. W. 3d 1( 2004), which relied upon medical authority from 1992. Moore appealed, claiming the CCA’s reasoning violated the Eighth Amendment.



In Atkins, the Supreme Court opened the door to allow states to develop their own tests for determining intellectual disability and ineligibility for the death penalty. However, as the states have developed different tests, the Court has indicated it will review these procedures to determine whether the states have created “an unacceptable risk that persons with intellectual disability will be executed.” Hall v. Florida, 572 U.S. at ___. Here, the Court took aim at Texas’ Atkins test for determining intellectual disability which was centered around out-dated medical information and court-created “factors” that have been widely criticized.


In holding that Mr. Moore was ineligible for the death penalty under Atkins, the circuit court relied on medical diagnostic standards coming from the 11th edition of the American Association on Intellectual and Development Disabilities (“AAIDD”) clinical manual and the 5th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (“DSM-5”) published by the American Psychiatric Association. The court followed the “generally accepted, uncontroversial intellectual-disability diagnostic definitions” in reaching their conclusion. Basically, the circuit court relied on the most up-to-date diagnostic material in assessing Moore.


The CCA rejected the circuit court’s conclusion and chastised it for not applying the Briseno test for determining intellectual disability. The Briseno test was based upon the 9th edition of the AAIDD and included a seven-factor test that was not grounded in any medical authority -- just a judicial creation. The CCA recognized that the standards in the AAIDD may have changed, but concluded that the Briseno test “remained adequately informed by the medical community’s diagnostic framework.”


The Supreme Court concluded that the CCA’s reliance on out-dated medical information and “factors” that have been widely criticized and rejected in the legal and medical community could not comport with the Eighth Amendment as well as Atkins and Hall. While the State’s have leeway in formulating their own approach to addressing Atkins claims, the cornerstone of any scheme must be “the medical community’s diagnostic framework.”



Read the decision here



If you or someone you know has been convicted of wrongful criminal charges, there is hope after the trial. Contact us today by clicking HERE.


Recent Posts


fultondale alabama second amendment springville alabama adnan syed, the mannequin challenge Etowah County Alabama, huntsville birmingham alabama gadsden alabama aiding and abetting judicial override illegal gun carry Walker County Alabama illegal gambling Malone v State court of criminal appeals court of criminal appeal releases mike gilotti Gardendale Alabama warrior alabama strickland v washington calhoun county alabama Tracie Todd sentencing law and policy blog summaries shooting death death penalty, morris alabama sheffield v state apprendi v new jersey department of justice CCA update texas operation crackdown Wesley Adam Whitworth sexual assault homicide rate Jefferson County Alabama New York Times criminal justice arson Alonzo Ephraim steve avery eleventh circuit ruling stanley brent chapman abduction 28 U.S.C. § 2254 campbell v state domestic violence limestone county alabama road rage legende v state making a murderer kenneth eugene billups eighth amendment, madison alabama mulga alabama constitutional violations fraud 2016 election, nathan woods greene county alabama trussville alabama ferguson missouri alfonso morris npr mobile alabama birchfield v north dakota Woods v State criminal justice reform, implied consent brady v maryland hoax destructive devices blount county alabama fort payne alabama blountsville alabama serial economic growth fake kidnapping, heflin alabama Dylann Roof parole albertville alabama terell corey mcmullin theft Eutaw Alabama huntsville alabama tuscaloosa alabama utah v strieff anniston alabama, foley alabama ring v arizona criminal mischief executions SCOTUS, jerry bohannon marion county st clair county alabama battles v state burglary heritage christian university Kay Ivey editorial lamar county lethal injection Donald Trump, assault Sardis Alabama cherokee county alabama drug seizure Xavier Beasley § 13A-3-23 prostitution sting Pleasant Grove Alabama narcotics investigation West Alabama pelham alabama stoves v state tarrant alabama montgomery alabama asia mcclain keith v state drug trafficking, home repair fraud bailey v us mccalla alabama unlawful manufacturing William Pryor sixth amendment habeas corpus relief drug crimes bomb threat drug possession, murder state of alabama betton v state Benn v State moving violations banville v state US Supreme Court Update benjamin todd acton mcwilliams v dunn debtor prison eugene lee jones v state talladega superspeedway armed robbery Joshua Reese minor offenses car accident endangerment of a child brian fredick lucas Guy Terrell Junior lethal injection drugs lauderdale county alabama crime of passion alabama criminal law roundup abandonment dekalb county alabama levins v state public assistance fraud smith v state LWOP Briarwood Presbyterian Church Lucky D Arcade Neil Gorsuch forced isolation Kareem Dacar Gaymon robberies pinson alabama midazolam fairfield alabama, gun rights Tommy Arthur beylund v north dakota christian guitierez homicide Stephen Breyer edwards v arizona Adamsville alabama drug activity oneonta alabama court systems, Fentanyl theft of property baldwin county alabama aziz sayyed brookside alabama pell city alabama death penalty nicholas hawkins russell calhoun christmas shooting eric sterling operation bullseye fourth amendment animal cruelty hurst mandamus south carolina Justice Sotomayor social media gun control hall v florida ex parte briseno warrantless blood draws Rule 32 self defense dora alabama Samuel Alito shelby county Marengo County Alabama hurst v florida dothan alabama pruitt v state peyton pruitt church robberies ake v oklahoma alabama Thomas Hardiman department of justice, identity theft scotus attempted murder Alabaster alabama abuse state of arizona felony assaults drug busts adger alabama kimberly alabama Mike Hubbard brendan dassey, steve avery, making a murderer, scotus, netflix boaz alabama domestic abuse street racing alabama supreme court negligent homicide sarah koenig cullman alabama john earle redfearn IV v state Easter hoover alabama alabama law enforcement agency shoplifting avondale alabama maryland court of special appeals rainbow city alabama utah supreme court florence alabama § 13A-3-23(d) immunity hearing Glaze v State capital murder embezzlement netflix kidnapping fraudulent checks bessemer alabama hanceville alabama brendan dassey constitutional law, OJ Simpson Made in America concealed carry mountain brook alabama towles v state decatur alabama Shonda Walker, bernard v north dakota mount olive alabama Ingmire v State Hillary Clinton, baltimore city circuit court morgan county alabama OJ Simpson drug smuggling underage drinking capital offenses breaking and entering clarence thomas capital punishment debit card skimming scams shooting moore v texas



These recoveries and testimonials are not an indication of future results. Every case is different, and regardless of what friends, family, or other individuals may say about what a case is worth, each case must be evaluated on its own facts and circumstances as they apply to the law. The valuation of a case depends on the facts, the injuries, the jurisdiction, the venue, the witnesses, the parties, and the testimony, among  other factors. Furthermore, no representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

Get Free Legal Advice  Contact us for a complimentary legal consultation

I am interested in scheduling a free legal consultation and receiving additional information.

Submitting Form...

The server encountered an error.

Thank you, your  entry has been  received.

© 2017 The Law Office of J.D. Lloyd, LLC. All Rights Reserved. |


As required by Rule 7.2(e), Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct, no representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.