Has the state appellate Court decided an important constitutional-federal Miranda rights question in a way that conflicts with the relevant decision(s) of this Court as determined in Westover v. U.S., decided with Miranda v. Arizona, and/or Mathis v. United States, and/or Brewer v. Williams?

Has the state appellate court decided an important constitutional-federal Miranda rights question in a way that petitioner being removed both in time and place from his original surrounding and taken into custody by a second agency authority and questioned about a different offense from what he is in custody for as part of a single continuing session of interrogation and the officer(s) did not have to re-advise petitioner of his Miranda rights in conflicts with the relevant decision(s) of this Court as determined in Westover v. U.S.; decided with Miranda v. Arizona, Mathis v. U.S. and/or Brewer v. Williams? that held in effect that if an accused is presented with a different case, after being taken into custody by a second agency authority, removed both in time and place from his original surrounding from what he is in custody for, he must be adequately be advise of his Miranda rights before being questioned.

Has the state appellate court decided an important Miranda rights question in a way that conflicts with the relevant decisions of this Court as determined in Westover v. U.S., decided with Miranda v. Arizona, and/or Mathis v. United States, and/or Brewer v. Williams?