Did the Tenth Circuit err in holding that the admitted evidence at trial established the same probative facts as the rejected evidence, without determining that the probative facts were essentially the same?

QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW The Petitioner claimed on appeal that he was denied the constitutional right to present defense evidence at his state court trial, entitling him to relief under 28 U.S.C. §2254. The question presented is: Did the Tenth Circuit, on review of the denial of 28 U.S.C. §2254 petition, err in holding that evidence admitted at trial essentially established what the rejected evidence would have established, without determining that the probative facts established by the admitted and rejected evidence were essentially the same.