Whether the Court of Appeals failed to follow the review requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) and the case law produced surrounding Strickland-v-Washington-466-U.S.-668-1984

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether the Court of Appeals failed to follow the review requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) and the case law produced surrounding Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984), by ignoring case law regarding investigating mitigation evidence and instead focused on James’ alleged behavior at the time of trial. 2. Whether this Court should consider the decision of the District Court to not hold an evidentiary hearing despite serious concerns about Jones’ mental health brought up in his Rule 32 petition undermines the ability to properly determine whether the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals decision was reasonable.