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


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



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.