Whether the inordinate delay between the defendant's conviction and capital sentencing proceedings prejudiced the defendant's ability to present mitigating evidence and, if so, what is the proper remedy

QUESTION PRESENTED The State of Missouri is set to execute an individual who, due to the passage of time and repetitive nature of his three capital sentencing proceedings, was deprived of the opportunity to fairly present his compelling mitigation in the form of live lay witnesses to the jury that sentenced him to death. This case presents the following question: Betterman v. Montana, 578 US. 437, 448 (2016), noted there is a due process limitation upon inordinate delays between conviction and sentencing. What is the proper test for determining whether the inordinate delay prejudiced the defendant’s ability to obtain a fundamentally fair capital sentencing proceeding and if the delay prejudiced the defendant, what is the proper remedy? i PROCEEDINGS DIRECTLY RELATED TO THIS CASE State v. Deck, 994 S.W.2d 527 (Mo. banc 1999). Docket No. 808221. Judgment enetered June 1, 1999. Deck v. State, 68 S.W.3d 418, 422 (Mo. banc 2002). Docket No. SC 83237. Judgment entered February 26, 2002. State v. Deck, 136 S.W.3d 481 (Mo. banc 2004). Docket No. SC 85443. Judgment entered May 25, 2004. Deck v. Missouri, 544 U.S. 622 (2005). Docket No. 04-5293. Judgment entered May 23, 2005, reversing the 2004 decision. State v. Deck, 303 S.W.3d 527 (Mo. banc 2010). Docket No. SC 89830. Judgment entered January 26, 2010. Deck v. State, 381 S.W.3d 339 (Mo. banc 2012). Docket No. SC 91746. Judgment entered July 3, 2012. Deck v. Steele, 249 F.Supp.3d 991 (E.D.Mo. 2017). Docket No. 4:12 CV 1527 CDP. Judgment entered April 13, 2017. Deck v. Jennings, 978 F.3d 578 (8th Cir. 2020). Docket No. 17-2055. Judgment entered October 19, 2020. State ex rel. Deck v. Blair, No. SC 99412, Docket No. SC99412. Judgment entered January 31, 2022. ii