Will the Supreme Court re-affirm Boykin v. Alabama and Strickland v. Washington for mentally challenged defendants?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED Will the Supreme Court just step aside or now step in for the current and future . generation of mental health defendants that desperately need this court's re-affirmation of its two Legendary and Landmark decisions: Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238. (1969): and Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) in the interests of national importance, justice, equality and fundamental fairness involving mentally challenged defendants incarcerated in. America like this petitioner sentenced to 300 months imprisonment who was medicated when induced to sign a plea agreement and was heavily sedated at the Rule 11 Guilty Plea Hearing from five-powerful psychotropic prescription medications known to cause haziness and to fog the mind, and lower courts resorting to less than constitu. ‘tionally sufficient plea colloquies that later becomes under challenge by Strickland and Boykin standards that the lower courts are rejecting in lieu of a "fair and just reason" standard like the one created by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in United States v. Garcia, 401 F.3d 1008, 1011 (9th Cir. 2005) ?