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


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



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.