Must a state-court appellate system address the merits of a defendant's Second Amendment as-applied challenge to a firearm-possession charge under Rahimi and intervening circuit precedent when those precedents first became available while the defendant's state-court appeal was in the pipeline?

When a criminal defendant in the middle of a direct appeal seeks relief that first becomes available as a result of an intervening decision from this Court, he gets the benefit of the new analytical framework; "the failure to raise the claim in an opening brief reflects not a lack of diligence, but merely a want of clairvoyance." Joseph v. United States, 574 U.S. 1038, 1039. (2014) (Kagan, J., concurring in denial of certiorari); see also Griffith v. Kentucky, 479 U.S. 314, 322 (1987); United States v. Smithers, 92 F.4th 237, 247 (4th Cir. 2024). But the Supreme Court of Ohio summarily refused to consider Petitioner Fredrick Johnson's as-applied Second Amendment challenge to his conviction, which he raised in his jurisdictional petition to that court on the strength of this Court's intervening decision in United States v. Rahimi, 602 U.S. 680 (2024), and the Sixth Circuit's application of Rahimi in United States v. Williams, 113 F.4th 637 (6th Cir. 2024). So the question presented is: Must a state-court appellate system address the merits of a defendant's Second Amendment as-applied challenge to a firearm-possession charge under Rahimi and intervening circuit precedent when those precedents first became available while the defendant's state-court appeal was in the pipeline? 111 RELATED CASES Both the State of Ohio and the United States prosecuted Mr. Johnson for possessing the same firearms. Ohio Proceedings (the Subject of this Petition) Mr. Johnson was convicted for firearm possession in the Common Pleas Court of Cuyahoga County, Ohio, in State v. Johnson, CR-23-677865-A (Ct. C.P. Cuyahoga Cty. June 29, 2023). The Ohio Court of Appeals for the Eighth Appellate District affirmed his convictions in State v. Johnson, 239 N.E.3d 475 (Ohio App. 8th Dist. 2024), en bane rev'w denied, No. 113034 (Ohio App. 8th Dist. Sept. 27, 2024). The Supreme Court of Ohio denied review in State u. Johnson, 250 N.E.3d 122 (Ohio 2025). Parallel Federal Proceedings (the Subject of a Separate, Concurrent Petition) Mr. Johnson was also convicted for firearm possession in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio in United States v. Johnson, No. 1:21cr-00596-SO (N.D. Ohio June 14, 2023). The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed his convictions in United States u. Johnson, No. 23-3535, 2025 WL 720930 (6th Cir. Mar. 6, 2025), en bane reu'w denied, No. 23-3535 (6th Cir. Apr. 8, 2025). Simultaneously with this petition, Mr. Johnson files a petition for writ of certiorari to the Sixth Circuit that raises the same issue.