Hamm v. Smith · ¶48

In reaching this conclusion, the Court observed that because a given IQ “test itself may be fawed, or administered in a consistently fawed manner, multiple examinations may result in repeated similar scores, so that even a consistent score is not conclusive evidence of intellectual functioning.” Ibid. From this, the Court reasoned that a court may not refuse to consider additional evidence beyond IQ scores, such as evidence of “the defendant's failure or inability to adapt to his social and cultural environment, including medical histories, behavioral records, school tests and reports, and testimony regarding past behavior and family circumstances,” if “the medical community accepts that [such] evidence can be probative of intellectual disability, including for individuals who have an IQ test score above 70.” Id., at 712. Thus, the Court held that Hall must “have the opportunity to…

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