Brief of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers as Amicus Curiae in Support of the Petitioner (on Petition for Writ of Certiorari).
Argument: Wood did not resolve the confusion among lower federal courts over the standard applicable to habeas challenges to state-court factual findings. For a decade, this Court has recognized confusion over the interplay between § 2254(d)(2) and § 2254(e)(1). Discord among lower courts has only increased since Wood. The ongoing circuit split risks different outcomes for petitioners with identical claims. This case is an ideal vehicle to resolve the circuit split. Applying the § 2254(e)(1) presumption to § 2254(d)(2) claims, as the Fifth Circuit did here, offends statutory text and congressional intent.