Hamm v. Smith · ¶82

Still, the Court suggested that someone with an IQ above 70 could not be mentally retarded for Eighth Amendment purposes. See id., at 308, n. 3, 316–318; Brumfeld v. Cain, 576 U. S. 305, 345–346 (2015) (Thomas, J., dissenting). The Court drew from “clinical definitions of mental retardation” that include three necessary elements. Atkins, 536 U. S., at 318. First, the offender must have “ `subaverage intellectual functioning' ” based primarily on IQ tests. Id., at 308, n. 3, 318. Second, he must have “significant limitations in adaptive skills such as communication, self-care, and self- direction.” Id., at 318. And third, these limitations must have manifested before age 18. Ibid. “ `Mild' mental retardation,” the Court explained, “is typically used to describe people with an IQ level of 50–55 to approximately 70.” Id., at 308, n. 3. Apparently drawing on that category's upper limit, the…

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