Petitioner James Milton Dailey was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death. He has since discovered that the State made knowing use of perjured testimony by one of the principal witnesses against him. But the Florida Supreme Court refused to set aside the conviction, holding that the fact that the prosecution's use of perjury was knowing and intentional has no bearing on whether the resulting conviction should be reversed.

Whether the State's knowing use of perjury is relevant to determining whether the perjured testimony was material to the verdict.

Whether perjured testimony that the State knowingly used must be deemed material to the verdict so long as there is any reasonable likelihood that the false testimony "could" have affected the judgment of the jury.

Whether the State's knowing use of perjury is relevant to determining whether the perjured testimony was material to the verdict