1. When a prisoner under a sentence of death has acquired compelling and undisputed evidence of his actual innocence after his trial that the state courts fail and refuse to give full and fair consideration, does the Constitution require that his innocence provide an independent and cognizable ground for relief from that sentence?

2. Is this compelling evidence of innocence sufficient to serve as both evidence in support of and a gateway to this Court's consideration of Petitioner's claim that his sentence of death is disproportionate pursuant to Enmund v. Florida and its progeny?

When a prisoner under a sentence of death has acquired compelling and undisputed evidence of his actual innocence after his trial that the state courts fail and refuse to give full and fair consideration, does the Constitution require that his innocence provide an independent and cognizable ground for relief from that sentence?