Whether the CCA's otherwise unexplained ruling that abuse of the writ under Article 11.071, § 5, precluded post-conviction relief is an adequate and independent state-law ground for the judgment, where the CCA's application of abuse of the writ is interwoven with federal law

QUESTIONS PRESENTED CAPITAL CASE The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (CCA) denied Petitioner’s claim, concerning a juror who harbored long-standing racial prejudice and lied about his background in order to be selected for the jury, as an abuse of the writ under Article 11.071, § 5. In applying section 5, the CCA reviews both whether there is a prima facie showing that the claim has merit, and whether the claim was factually or legally unavailable at the time of any prior filings by the applicant. Both prongs require the CCA to assess the state of federal law as it applies to the claim raised. Abuse-of-the-writ analysis under Texas law is therefore frequently intertwined with questions of federal constitutional law. Here, however, and in many other cases, the CCA simply stated its conclusion that Petitioner had abused the writ, without providing any reasoning to explain to what extent its decision was based on a review of the merits of the federal claim or the state of federal law. This Court has granted certiorari and is currently considering comparable issues in Cruz v. Arizona, No. 21-846. The questions presented here are: 1. Whether the CCA’s otherwise unexplained ruling that abuse of the writ under Article 11.071, § 5, precluded post-conviction relief is an adequate and independent state-law ground for the judgment, where the CCA’s application of abuse of the writ is interwoven with federal law? 2. Whether this case should be held pending this Court’s decision in Cruz v. Arizona? 3. Whether this Court should remand this case to the Texas courts with instructions to consider the merits of the claims of a juror’s racial bias and misconduct? i