Did the state court contravene Chambers and Holmes by excluding serial killer Smith's confession and condemning an innocent man to the fate of dying in prison?

QUESTION PRESENTED Strengthening Chambers v. Mississippi, this Court in Holmes v. South Carolina, 547 U.S. 319 (2006), held that even where the government’s forensic evidence is strong, defendants have a due process right to present exculpatory evidence that someone else committed a murder. Despite Chambers and Holmes, the state court excluded evidence of serialkiller Smith’s confession. Did the state court contravene Chambers and Holmes by excluding serial killer Smith’s confession and condemning an innocent man to the fate of dying in prison?