In a state postconviction habeas corpus proceeding in which the petitioner alleged that a material witness testified falsely at trial, does it violate "fundamental fairness" —per Pennsylvania v. Finley, 481 U.S. 552 (1987) and District Attorney's Office for the Third Judicial District v. Osborne, 557 U.S. 50 (2009) —for the state appellate court to exclude from its consideration relevant, reliable, material evidence related to the false testimony claim admitted in the state postconviction proceedings because the habeas petitioner failed to plead facts related to that evidence in his habeas petition, where there was no such pleading requirement as a matter of state law until the decision in the habeas petitioner's case?

Whether it violates fundamental fairness for a state appellate court to exclude reliable evidence in a postconviction habeas proceeding due to a procedural technicality not previously existing