The U.S. Supreme Court refused to block the execution of Victor Saldaño, convicted of murder in Texas in 1996, despite his supporters asserting that he is intellectually disabled, making him ineligible for execution under the law.
Saldaño received his conviction due to a failed robbery that led to murder. His initial legal team did not challenge his intellectual capacity at trial. At the time of his crime, Saldaño was in the U.S. illegally.
Later, his case was brought to the Texas Office of Capital Forensic Writs, a public defender’s office specializing in such cases. Attorneys there established that Saldaño’s IQ was 74, which could potentially exempt him from execution.
Ben Wolff, the director of the Forensic Writs office, traveled to Argentina, Saldaño’s upbringing location, where he gathered testimony from acquaintances, family, and educators. They depicted Saldaño as occasionally delusional and unable to comprehend basic instructions, such as safely crossing the street.
After reviewing these findings, Texas prosecutors acknowledged Saldaño shouldn’t face the death penalty. However, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ruled otherwise, prompting Saldaño’s attorneys to appeal to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court’s denial to review Saldaño’s case on Monday means his execution will likely proceed, although his legal representatives pledge to persist in their efforts.
The Supreme Court’s decision concluded with a 6-to-3 vote, with dissent from the court’s liberal justices. Wolff expressed frustration, stating, “Every expert assessed Mr. Saldaño and concluded he is intellectually disabled. Texas, which initially pursued his execution, now agrees he meets the criteria for intellectual disability. It is disappointing that the judiciary has yet to allow us to present what we consider compelling evidence that Mr. Saldaño is intellectually disabled, prohibiting his execution by the U.S. Constitution.”
Leave a Reply