Whether the Eleventh Circuit erred in applying 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) to the state appellate court's unexplained decision, rather than 'looking through' that decision to the reasoned opinion of the state trial court

QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 1. In light of Wilson v. Sellers, 584 U.S. __, 138 S. Ct. 1188 (2018), did the Eleventh Circuit err in applying 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) to the state appellate court’s unexplained decision, rather than “looking through” that decision to the reasoned opinion of the state trial court? II. Where a third person spontaneously confesses multiple times to friends and gives a sworn statement that he committed the crime for which the defendant is being prosecuted, but his confessions also include facts that provide a potential defense to prosecution, are those confessions nonetheless admissible as a matter of constitutional law under Chambers v. Mississippi, 410 U.S. 284 (1978), if the third person stood to benefit nothing by disclosing his role in the shooting and must have been aware of the possibility that his disclosure would lead to criminal prosecution? i