Whether the process of review implemented by Arizona in claims of ineffective assistance of counsel satisfy Fourteenth Amendment protections

QUESTION PRESENTED In Smith v. Robbins, 528 U.S. 259 (2000), this Court determined that, in order to ensure that defendants are provided an adequate opportunity to present their appellate claims, states must implement minimum proper safeguards sufficient to satisfy Due Process. The question presented is: , whether the process of review implemented by Arizona in claims of ineffective assistance of counsel satisfy Fourteenth Amendment protections where the court fails to conduct a review of omitted issues against those raised in order to determine whether omitted issues were “clearly stronger” and to thereby ensure that a defendant was afforded an adequate and effective appeal in compliance with the Fourteenth Amendment.