Did the California Court of Appeal err in concluding that inflammatory-propensity-evidence,pervasively-used,erroneously-admitted did not render the trial fundamentally-unfair,violating-due-process

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED oO Did the California Court of Appeal err when it concluded that inflammatory propensity evidence, pervasively used and: erroneously admitted in the petitioner's criminal trial, did not render the . trial fundamentally unfair by violating petitioner's Fourteenth Amendment right of due process guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution? cd 7 —— , _