Hamm v. Smith · ¶166

This analysis cannot justify granting Atkins relief. First, it is not enough for Smith to show that his “true” IQ “could be” or “may be” 70 or lower. Rather, Smith needed to show that his IQ is 70 or lower. Moreover, even if the District Court defnitively concluded that Smith had a 70-or-lower IQ, the court's reasoning could not support such a conclusion. For reasons that I have already discussed, it is unsound to hold that Smith satisfied a 70-IQ threshold simply because the lower limits of the intervals for some scores descended to 70. To obtain relief, Smith needs to prove that his scores cumulatively demonstrate a “true” IQ of 70 or lower.

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.