Amy Howe

May 19 2021

Justices won’t postpone Texas execution

This post was updated on May 19 at 8:35 p.m.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to block the execution of Quintin Jones, a Texas man who was sentenced to death for the 1999 murder of his great-aunt, Berthena Bryant. Shortly after the court’s unsigned order allowing the execution to go forward, Jones was put to death by lethal injection at a state prison in Texas, according to news reports.

Jones had asked the justices to stay his execution to give them time to consider two claims on the merits. First, he contended that the Supreme Court’s 2017 decision in Moore v. Texas, holding that the use of outdated medical standards to determine whether someone is intellectually disabled and therefore cannot be executed, applied retroactively to his conviction. Second, he argued that his death sentence should be invalidated because prosecutors relied on testimony from a psychiatrist that has since been discredited.

Texas urged the Supreme Court to allow the execution – scheduled for Wednesday at 7 p.m. EDT  – to proceed, telling the justices that they didn’t need to decide in this case whether Moore applies retroactively because the state court ruled that Jones could not show that he was intellectually disabled. Nor, Texas argued, could Jones show that “the State knowingly presented false testimony through an expert whose methods may have been discredited at some time after trial.”

In a brief order on Wednesday evening, the justices turned down Jones’ request to put his execution on hold and take up his appeals. There were no publicly recorded dissents from the court’s order.

This post is also published on SCOTUSblog.

Amy L Howe
Until September 2016, Amy served as the editor and reporter for SCOTUSblog, a blog devoted to coverage of the Supreme Court of the United States; she continues to serve as an independent contractor and reporter for SCOTUSblog. Before turning to full-time blogging, she served as counsel in over two dozen merits cases at the Supreme Court and argued two cases there. From 2004 until 2011, she co-taught Supreme Court litigation at Stanford Law School; from 2005 until 2013, she co-taught a similar class at Harvard Law School. She has also served as an adjunct professor at American University’s Washington College of Law and Vanderbilt Law School. Amy is a graduate of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and holds a master’s degree in Arab Studies and a law degree from Georgetown University.
Tweets by @AHoweBlogger
Recent ScotusBlog Posts from Amy
  • Venezuelan TPS recipients tell justices to let status stand
  • Government asks justices to allow DHS to revoke parole for a half-million noncitizens
  • Supreme Court allows Trump to ban transgender people from military
More from Amy Howe

Recent Posts

  • Court appears to back legality of HHS preventative care task force
  • Justices take up Texas woman’s claim against USPS
  • Supreme Court considers parents’ efforts to exempt children from books with LGBTQ themes
  • Justices temporarily bar government from removing Venezuelan men under Alien Enemies Act
  • Court hears challenge to ACA preventative-care coverage
Site built and optimized by Sound Strategies