Was it objectively reasonable for the State courts to conclude that no reasonable factfinder could believe that Baker was in custody during interrogation?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED 1. Was it objectively vareasonable , under ag ws.c, $aas4 (dc), for the State courts to conclude on te record bere + that no reasonable Fadfinder could believe tat Raker was iA cushy durin interno gett on Orn Nan 27 US ? 2. Under 29 WS0. Fay (AICI) or CdD(a) , abl He State Courts £oiluce +o provide a Full and far heariny aN refusing do allow prritioner te opportuach to testefiy inthe motion to Suppress and Sackson v. Denno heaving result in an unreasonable eviden Banh foundation os obechvely, unnasonable Asherrn’ nation of te | fads presented nth protetd ings ? 3, Was the State court's dlobermination Hut Baker was £ pot in custo, durino iicterrdgoct YON *Cortrane, + >” or on” inreasona ble, application” oF clearl, vstubhined Supreme Court law ?