Whether the majority of circuits are correct that comity prevents Federal courts in proceedings under 28 U.S.C. 2254 from overturning legal conclusions reached by State supreme courts about procedural defaults within their own State post-conviction paradigms, or the Eighth Circuit is correct that it can supplant its own characterization of the State court proceedings without any deference typically accorded to other State court rulings in §2254 litigation

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether the majority of circuits are correct that comity prevents Federal courts in proceedings under 28 U.S.C. 2254 from overturning legal conclusions reached by State supreme courts about procedural defaults within their own State post-conviction paradigms, or the Eighth Circuit is correct that it can supplant its own characterization of the State court proceedings without any deference typically accorded to other State court rulings in §2254 litigation. 2. Whether an inmate who demonstrated “cause and prejudice” to prevail on a District Court’s procedural default ruling in §2254 litigation is later precluded from seeking application of Coleman’s “fundamental miscarriage of justice” exception in his or her Circuit Court reply brief, after the State sought review of the procedural default ruling without first cross-appealing. u PARTIES TO PROCEEDING AND