Whether the Arizona Supreme Court, during reweighing on collateral review to correct its error under Eddings v. Oklahoma, 455 U.S. 104 (1982), is required to consider all available mitigation evidence, or may its review be limited to only the specific mitigation evidence that caused the initial Eddings error?

Whether the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals applied an erroneous, heightened standard for issuance of a Certificate of Appealability when it held that no reasonable jurist could debate whether the question presented above was previously decided, and thus procedurally barred as a second or successive petition for writ of habeas corpus?

Whether the Arizona Supreme Court is required to consider all available mitigation evidence during reweighing on collateral review to correct an Eddings error