Whether due process requires reversal of a capital conviction infected with errors the State no longer defends

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether due process of law requires reversal, where a capital conviction is so infected with errors that the State no longer seeks to defend it. 2. Whether the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals erred in holding there was no due process violation because there is “no reasonable likelihood” that the prosecution’s use of admittedly false, misleading, and unreliable DNA evidence to secure Petitioner’s capital conviction could have affected any juror’s judgment.