1. Have the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals improperly applied Barefoot v. Estelle to categorically foreclose any claim that the admission of unreliable expert testimony in a particular case violates the Constitution?

2. Did the Fifth Circuit improperly hold that expert evidence in sentencing hearings in capital trials is exempt from the normal reliability standards of Daubert and that the Eighth Amendment reliability requirement does not apply to such testimony?

Whether the Fifth Circuit and Texas courts improperly applied Barefoot v. Estelle to categorically foreclose claims that unreliable expert testimony on future dangerousness violates the Constitution, and whether the Fifth Circuit erred in holding that the Daubert reliability standard does not apply to expert evidence in capital sentencing hearings