The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear the case of Victor Saldaño, a Texas inmate convicted of murder in 1996, leaving in place lower-court rulings that make his execution likely. Saldaño’s legal team and later state experts concluded he is intellectually disabled, which under constitutional law would bar him from being executed.
Saldaño was convicted for a robbery that ended in murder. His trial lawyers did not raise an intellectual disability claim at trial. He was in the United States without legal authorization at the time of the crime. The case was later referred to the Texas Office of Capital Forensic Writs, a state public defender office, which found evidence supporting a disability claim and reported an IQ score of 74.
Ben Wolff, director of the Forensic Writs office, traveled to Argentina, where Saldaño grew up, to interview neighbors, family members and teachers. According to accounts gathered there, people described episodes of delusion and difficulty understanding basic safety and everyday tasks. After reviewing that evidence, prosecutors in Texas agreed Saldaño should not be eligible for the death penalty.
Despite the expert evaluations and the state’s concession, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals rejected the intellectual disability claim. Saldaño’s lawyers then asked the Supreme Court to intervene. The high court denied review by a 6-3 vote, with the court’s three liberal justices dissenting.
Saldaño’s attorneys said they will continue seeking relief to prevent his execution. Wolff said in a statement that every expert who evaluated Saldaño has concluded he is intellectually disabled, and that it is disappointing the courts have not yet allowed the case to be fully heard despite the state’s agreement that he meets the criteria that would bar execution under the Constitution.