Whether the Arizona courts unreasonably applied Batson v. Kentucky and unreasonably determined the constitutionally significant facts, thus violating the equal protection clause

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether the Arizona courts unreasonably applied Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986) and unreasonably determined the constitutionally significant facts thus violating the equal protection clause by striking both (all) minority voir dire panel members. 2. Whether the Arizona state courts violated Eddings v. Oklahoma, 455 U.S. 104 (1982) and unreasonably determined the constitutionally significant facts by refusing to consider Mr. Murray’s substantial mitigation evidence by the courts’ concluding the evidence was not connected to the crime. 3. Whether harmless error applies when a state court holds mitigation evidence that shows no direct nexus to the crime will automatically not be considered and if harmless error does apply to such constitutional violations whether the Ninth Circuit erred in ruling that the Arizona state courts’ violation of Eddings was harmless error. i