Hamm v. Smith · ¶33

In fact, none of the experts, not even the State's expert, combined Smith's scores using any method that Alabama now claims is necessary. Not one of the experts calculated a composite score, used the mean or median, examined the “overlap” of the scores' error ranges, or relied solely on the highest score. Nor did any expert testify that using such methods was the most scientifcally sound way to evaluate Smith's intellectual functioning. Instead, all three considered all the scores in addition to other evidence and used their own clinical judgment to render conclusions about Smith's intellectual functioning. In other words, each expert assessed the scores holistically.

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