Summary
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit temporarily stayed Edward Lee Busby’s scheduled execution pending further order. The consolidated matter concerns Busby’s request for a certificate of appealability, authorization to file a successive habeas petition, and habeas relief based on an Atkins v. Virginia intellectual-disability claim. The panel was divided, with one judge supporting habeas relief, one supporting a temporary stay pending the Supreme Court’s decision in Hamm v. Smith, and one dissenting from the stay and advocating denial of relief.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Busby's execution should be temporarily stayed pending further order of the Fifth Circuit.
- Whether Busby's Rule 60(b) motion should be treated as a successive federal habeas petition.
- Whether Busby was entitled to a certificate of appealability.
- Whether Busby's Atkins intellectual-disability claim satisfied the deferential standard for federal habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(2).
- Whether Busby should be authorized to file a successive habeas petition.
Holdings
- The Fifth Circuit temporarily stayed Busby's execution, which was scheduled for May 14, 2026, pending further order of the court.
- The per curiam order did not resolve the merits of Busby's Atkins claim; the judges issued conflicting views, and the operative disposition was only a temporary stay pending further order.
Key quotations
“Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the execution scheduled for May 14, 2026, is temporarily STAYED pending further order of this court.” (2)
“A federal court cannot grant habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) unless the adjudication of the claim (1) resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States; or (2) resulted in a decision that was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding.” (18-19)
“Even when a person has taken multiple tests, each separate score must be assessed using the SEM, and the analysis of multiple IQ scores jointly is a complicated endeavor.” (22)
Factual background
Busby was convicted of capital murder-related offenses and sentenced to death in Texas. In later state habeas proceedings, he presented multiple IQ tests, adaptive-functioning evidence, and expert opinions concerning intellectual disability under Atkins v. Virginia. Busby's expert concluded that he was intellectually disabled, and the State's expert stated that she could not controvert that conclusion, but the state trial court rejected the claim and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals adopted the findings. Busby's execution was scheduled for May 14, 2026.
Procedural history
Busby was convicted in Texas of kidnapping, robbery, and murder and sentenced to death. After prior state and federal habeas proceedings concerning an Atkins intellectual-disability claim, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals remanded a later Atkins application for merits review, but ultimately denied relief. Busby then filed a Rule 60(b) motion in federal district court based on the earlier denial of funding for expert assistance; the district court treated the motion as a successive habeas petition, transferred it to the Fifth Circuit, and alternatively denied it. The Fifth Circuit granted a temporary stay of execution pending further order, while the judges disagreed about whether to grant habeas relief and how to treat the Rule 60(b) motion.