Hamm v. Smith · ¶61

At bottom, the principal dissent's central complaint with the lower courts' decisions is not truly with the method by which the District Court analyzed the scores. Rather, the dissent looks at Smith's five scores at face value and cannot fathom that Smith has significantly subaverage intellectual functioning. The Court rightly decides not to “upset the considered judgment[s] of the forensic psychologist[s] that the factfnding court deemed the most credible based on [the dissent's] own interpretation of a few sentences excised from medical texts.” Moore, 581 U. S., at 33 (Roberts, C. J., joined by Thomas and Alito, JJ., dissenting).

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