Court: U.S. Supreme Court
Overview: The brief argued that Texas’ use of the Briseno factors to determine intellectual disability in death penalty cases was unconstitutional because they are based on stereotypes rather than well-established clinical standards.
Excerpt: “In implementing this Court’s decision in Atkins v. Virginia, Texas has essentially replaced the clinical definition’s carefully crafted requirements with a formula of its own devising, one that rests heavily on stereotypes about people with intellectual disability. This approach is inconsistent with accepted clinical standards.”
Status: In 2015, the Supreme Court denied review. However, the Court granted review of a case raising similar challenges to the Briseno factors—Moore v. Texas—and ultimately held in that case that the use of such factors in determining intellectual disability in death penalty cases was unconstitutional.