Hall v. Florida (572 U.S. 701)

U.S. Supreme Court · decided May 27, 2014 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)

Citation
572 U.S. 701 · 134 S. Ct. 1986
Decided
May 27, 2014
Term
October Term 2013
Vote
5–4
Majority author
Justice Kennedy
Issue area
Criminal Procedure
Disposition
Reversed and remanded
Outcome
Petitioning party won
Ideological direction
Liberal
Constitutional ruling
State/territorial law held unconstitutional

Opinion excerpt

Unconstitutional as Applied Fla. Stat. Ann. § 921.137(1) Validity Called into Doubt Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 532.130(2); Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-264.3:1.1; Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 13-753(F); 11 West's Del.C. § 4209(d)(3); Kan. Stat. Ann. § 76-12b01; N.C. Gen. Stat. Ann. § 15A-2005; Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 10.95.030(2)(c) Syllabus* After this Court held that the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments forbid the execution of persons with intellectual disability, see Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304, 321, 122 S.Ct. 2242, 153 L.Ed.2d 335, Hall asked a Florida state court to vacate his sentence, presenting evidence that included an IQ test score of 71. The court denied his motion, determining that a Florida statute mandated that he show an IQ score of 70 or below before being permitted to present any additional intellectual disability evidence. The State Supreme Court rejected Hall's appeal, finding the State's 70-point threshold constitutional. Held : The State's threshold requirement, as interpreted by the Florida Supreme Court, is unconstitutional. Pp. 1992 - 2001. (a) The Eighth Amendment, which "reaffirms the duty of the government to respect the dignity of all persons," Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551, 560, 125 S.Ct. 1183, 161 L.Ed.2d 1, prohibits the execution of persons with intellectual disability. No legitimate penological purpose is served by executing the intellectually disabled.…

Excerpt of a 88,757-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.

← Back to the decisions database