Did the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals violate due process and/or commit reversable error when it applied PINHOLSTER to bar evidentiary hearing?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED mY * Did the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals violate due process and/or commit reversable error when it applied PINHOLSTER to bar evidentiary hearing? * Under this Court's recent ruling in SHINN V MARTINEZ-RAMIREZ, “ MARTINEZ exceptions to procedural default for ineffective assistance of trial counsel claims does not apply to §2254(e)(2)'s evidentiary hearing bar for failing to develop the factual basis of the claim. But when a Texas pro se petitioner develops evidence to ‘ support his claims in the state habeas proceedings -but fails to present that evicence in compliance with state procedural "rules -is this a procedural defaudt-covered by MARTINEZ, or is the petitioner still considered to have "failed to develop" the claim under §2254(e)(2)? : + Did the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals violate Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 52(a)(6) and this Court's precedent in AMEDEO V ZANT when it supplanted its fact finding over the district court's finding? ‘ * Did the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals deny habeas review of petitioner's evidence supporting his ineffective assistance of trial counsel claim because of a state procedural rule that was either not in effect or not firmly established at the time of the petitionaer's state habeas proceeding?