Case Citator › Ledford v. Warden, Georgia Diagnostic & Classification Prison

Ledford v. Warden, Georgia Diagnostic & Classification Prison

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Abrogated
Court
Eleventh Circuit
Citation
818 F.3d 600
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
35 of 35
Citing cases (total)
35
Treatment dates
2017
Abrogated
A reviewed court treats this case as abrogated by later authority. Ledford v. Warden, Georgia Diagnostic & Classification Prison was abrogated on its IQ standard-error rule. Moore v. Texas requires a court to consider adaptive functioning when the lower end of a valid IQ score's error range is 70 or less.
More on how this was screened

The Eleventh Circuit recognized in Joseph Clifton Smith v. Commissioner, Alabama Department of Corrections that Ledford's contrary suggestion is no longer good law. All 35 flagged citations have been read; the confirmed treatment is listed below. Later district courts continued to cite Ledford's separate discussion of AEDPA deference.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

35 later cases cite Ledford v. Warden, Georgia Diagnostic & Classification Prison; 35 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Ledford v. Warden, Georgia Diagnostic & Classification Prison?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Abrogated

  • The Supreme Court displaced Ledford's rule allowing courts to discount the lower end of an IQ score's standard-error range when deciding whether to examine adaptive functioning.

    Moore v. Texas · Supreme Court of the United States · filed

    Because the lower end of Moore’s score range falls at or below 70, the CCA had to move on to consider Moore’s adaptive functioning.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Ledford v. Warden, Georgia Diagnostic & Classification Prison and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace