Whether the Tenth Circuit contravened this Court's precedents in ruling that Petitioner was not denied due process of law — based on ex post facto principles — when he was convicted for a fatal shooting that the federal jury unanimously found occurred in self-defense as defined by the Oklahoma law that governed his conduct at the time and place, before this Court announced its McGirt decision?

QUESTION PRESENTED Several months after Petitioner shot and killed another man in self-defense, this Honorable Court issued its decision in McGirt v. Oklahoma, 591 U.S. -, 140 S. Ct. 2452 (2020), holding that Congress never disestablished the Muscogee (Creek) Reservation in eastern Oklahoma and, thus, it constitutes Indian country for purposes of exclusive federal criminal jurisdiction under the federal Major Crimes Act. The State of Oklahoma’s prosecution of Petitioner, a registered citizen of the Cherokee Nation, for manslaughter was consequently dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and the federal government brought charges against him for first-degree murder in Indian country. A federal jury convicted Petitioner of the lesser-included offense of voluntary manslaughter under federal law, but stated in its unanimous response to a special interrogatory that it would have acquitted him, had Oklahoma state law regarding justifiable homicide applied. The question presented is: Whether the Tenth Circuit contravened this Court’s precedents in ruling that Petitioner was not denied due process of law — based on ex post facto principles — when he was convicted for a fatal shooting that the federal jury unanimously found occurred in self-defense as defined by the Oklahoma law that governed his conduct at the time and place, before this Court announced its McGirt decision? il