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


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



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.