Hamm v. Smith · ¶51
In Moore, the Texas courts had discounted the lower end of the standard error range for Moore's score of 74 because he “was likely exerting poor effort and experiencing depression at the time the test was administered.” 581 U. S., at 25 (Roberts, C. J., joined by Thomas and Alito, JJ., dissenting). The Court rejected that reasoning because “the presence of other sources of imprecision in administering the test to a particular individual . . . cannot narrow the test- specific standard-error range.” Id., at 15 (majority opinion). The Court held that, “in line with Hall, . . . courts [must] continue the inquiry and consider other evidence of intellectual disability where an individual's IQ score, adjusted for the test's standard error, falls within the clinically established range for intellectual-functioning defcits.” Id., at 15. Because Moore had a score of 74, which “yield[ed] a range…Read in context ›
preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.