United States Fifth Circuit

In a habeas proceedings seeking a de novo federal court decision on whether petitioner's alleged mental retardation constitutionally exempted him from execution, the court finds that the petitioner was entitled to a review and returns the case where: 1) the petitioner suffered prejudice from the then uncertain state of Texas law on how to present Atkins evidence in state court; 2) the district court had the authority to review his claim even if it was unexhausted; and 3) the district court was under no obligation to defer to the state court's decision.

Appellate Information

• Decided 06/26/2008
• Published 06/26/2008

Judges

• PER CURIAM:, Before JONES, Chief Judge, and KING, JOLLY, DAVIS, SMITH, WIENER, BARKSDALE, GARZA, BENAVIDES, STEWART, DENNIS, CLEMENT, PRADO, OWEN, ELROD, SOUTHWICK and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Fifth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Thomas Scott Smith (argued), Smith & Smith, Sherman, TX, Gregory William Wiercioch, Tex. Def. Serv., San Francisco, CA, for Moore., Edward Larry Marshall (argued), Austin, TX, for Quarterman.