When must the Court exercise its supervisory power to assure the fairness of the judicial process?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. When, in reviewing the two-part claim that trial counsel was ineffective both for failing to provide known, relevant information to mental health experts appointed to determine Butler’s trial competence, and for failing altogether to conduct any investigation of Butler’s competence, the court of appeals recasts the claim as solely a failure to provide known information to the appointed experts, then denies that un-presented claim, must the Court exercise its supervisory power to assure the fairness of the judicial process? 2. When, in reviewing the claim that trial counsel was ineffective for failing altogether to conduct any investigation of Butler’s mental health afflictions as mitigating evidence, the court of appeals wholly mis-characterizes the mitigating evidence that reasonable investigation would have found and then analyzes the prejudice associated with counsel’s deficient performance against a state law framework that was not the law at the time Butler was tried, must the Court exercise its supervisory power to assure the fairness of the judicial process? i