Whether the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals violated Petitioner's Sixth Amendment rights and contravened this Court's Strickland v. Washington precedent

QUESTIONS PRESENTED L Whether, when a collateral review court is determining whether trial counsel was ineffective in failing to present certain mitigating evidence, an analysis of the nexus between the new mitigating evidence and the underlying crime is violative of the Eighth Amendment and this Court’s decisions in Tennard v. Dretke, 542 U.S. 274 (2004) and Smith v. Texas, 543 U.S. 37 (2004). II. Whether the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals violated Petitioner’s Sixth Amendment rights and contravened this Court’s Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) line of precedent in finding that Petitioner’s sentencing counsel were not deficient and that their performance did not prejudice him when they failed to investigate mitigating evidence regarding Petitioner’s brain damage. i