Whether the exceptions to the Teague v. Lane rule for retroactive application of new constitutional rules of criminal procedure apply to the rule announced in McCoy v. Louisiana

QUESTION PRESENTED In 2018, this Court held in McCoy v. Louisiana, 138 S. Ct. 1500, that “a defendant has the right to insist that counsel refrain from admitting guilt even when counsel’s experienced-based view is that confessing guilt offers the defendant the best chance to avoid the death penalty,” id. at 1505. Prior to this Court deciding McCoy, a Louisiana jury convicted petitioner Bobby Hampton following a trial in which Hampton’s lawyers admitted Hampton’s guilt, even though Hampton expressed to his lawyers his desire that they maintain his innocence. In the decision below, a Louisiana trial court denied Hampton post-conviction relief on the ground that McCoy did not apply retroactively on collateral review to cases, like Hampton’s, which had become final before this Court decided McCoy. The question presented in this petition is whether either of the exceptions to this Court’s general rule that “new constitutional rules of criminal procedure will not be applicable to those cases which have become final before the new rules are announced,” Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288, 310 (1989) (plurality op.), applies to McCoy. @