[PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 21-14519 ____________________

JOSEPH CLIFTON SMITH, Petitioner-Appellee, versus COMMISSIONER, ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,

Respondent-Appellant.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama D.C. Docket No. 1:05-cv-00474-CG-M ____________________ USCA11 Case: 21-14519 Document: 46-1 Date Filed: 05/19/2023 Page: 2 of 38

2 Opinion of the Court 21-14519

Before WILSON, JORDAN, and ROSENBAUM, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: This appeal concerns whether the district court clearly erred in finding that Joseph Clifton Smith is intellectually disabled and, as a result, that his death sentence violates the Eighth Amendment. We hold that the district court did not clearly err. We therefore affirm the district court’s judgment vacating Smith’s sentence. I. A. A jury found petitioner Joseph Clifton Smith guilty of capital murder. Durk Van Dam was brutally murdered on November 23, 1997. Smith v. Campbell (“Smith III”), 620 F. App’x 734, 736 (11th Cir. 2015). Police found Van Dam’s body in an isolated area near his pick-up truck in Mobile County. Id. On the same day that police discovered Van Dam’s body, they interviewed Petitioner Joseph Clifton Smith. Id. Although Smith confessed to Van Dam’s murder, he offered two conflicting versions of the crime. Id. At first, he said that he watched Van Dam’s murder. Id. Then, he said that he participated, but that he didn’t intend to kill Van Dam. Id. A grand jury in Mobile County eventually indicted Smith for capital murder. Id. The case went to trial, and the jury found Smith guilty. Id. at 736–37. USCA11 Case: 21-14519 Document: 46-1 Date Filed: 05/19/2023 Page: 3 of 38

21-14519 Opinion of the Court 3

B. During the sentencing phase of Smith’s trial, the parties pre- sented evidence of Smith’s intellectual abilities. During the sentencing phase, the parties presented evidence concerning aggravating and mitigating factors. One mitigating fac- tor was whether Smith committed the crime while he “was under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance.” Ala. Code § 13A-5-51(2). Both sides presented evidence of Smith’s child- hood, family background, and intellectual abilities to contest whether that mitigating factor applied to Smith. Smith’s mother and sister testified that his father was an abu- sive alcoholic. Smith III, 620 F. App’x at 738–39. Smith’s father beat the children with belts and water hoses. Id. Smith’s mother and father divorced when Smith was nine or ten years old. Id. at 738. Soon after his parents divorced, Smith’s mother remarried to a man named Hollis Luker. Like Smith’s father, Luker beat the children and was drunk “just about every day.” Id. at 739. Smith’s neighbor testified that his mother would bring Smith and his sib- lings to the neighbor’s home to e