In a case involving the substantive offenses of murder and robbery, can the offense of robbery be included as an element in a felony murder instruction resulting in a guilty verdict, then presented separately in a jury instruction for robbery with a firearm, also resulting in a guilty verdict without violating the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment?

Did the Sixth Circuit abrogate the intent of 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) when it failed to apply this Court's precedent of Harris v. Oklahoma that "a subsequent prosecution for robbery, with a firearm was barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause because the Defendant had already been tried for felony murder based on the same underlying felony" to the same facts present here?

Does U.S. CONST, art. III, § 2, cl.1, mandate this Court address the important public interest of Double Jeopardy proscriptions against the States, when the lower Federal courts have impermissibly given the State court decision deference when that decision is the very antithesis of Harris v. Oklahoma?

Can the offense of robbery be included as an element in a felony murder instruction and also presented separately in a jury instruction for robbery with a firearm without violating the Double Jeopardy Clause?