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


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



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.