Case ID: f3d_868/html/0314-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

James Lee HENDERSON, Petitioner-Appellant v. Lorie DAVIS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, Respondent-Appellee
    No. 14-70001
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    FILED August 9, 2017
    Eric M. Albritton, Albritton Law Firm, Longview, TX, Elizabeth L. DeRieux, Cap-shaw DeRieux, L.L.P., Gladewater, TX, for Petitioner-Appellant.
    
      Arthur D’Andrea, Stephen M. Hoffman, Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General, Matthew Hamilton Frederick, Deputy Solicitor General, Office of the Solicitor General, Austin, TX, for Respondent-Appellee.
    Sheri L. Johnson, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, for Amici Curiae American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities and Are of the United States.
    Mark Keith Glasser, Senior Litigation Attorney, Sidley Austin, L.L.P., Houston, TX, for Amicus Curiae Texas Psychological Association.
    Before JOLLY, SMITH, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.
   ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

PER CURIAM:

This Court affirmed the district court’s denial of Henderson’s successive federal habeas petition in which he claimed that he is intellectually disabled and thus ineligible to be executed under Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304, 122 S.Ct. 2242, 153 L.Ed.2d 335 (2002). Henderson v. Stephens, 791 F.3d 567 (5th Cir. 2015). The Supreme Court granted certiorari, vacated our judgment, and remanded this case to us for further consideration in the light of Moore v. Texas, — U.S. -, 137 S.Ct. 1039, 197 L.Ed.2d 416 (2017). Henderson v. Davis, — U.S. -, 137 S.Ct. 1450, 197 L.Ed.2d 644 (2017). It appears that the remand from the Supreme Court is best vetted and addressed first by the district court.

Accordingly, we VACATE the judgment of the district court and REMAND this case to the district court for further proceedings in the light of Moore.