Could reasonable jurists debate whether, under the Due Process Clause standards set out in Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979), and In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358 (1979), the state court unreasonably applied clearly established Supreme Court law under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1) because the prosecution failed to establish "forcible compulsion," as defined by the Oregon Supreme Court, beyond a reasonable doubt, and made unreasonable factual determinations under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(2) and (e)(1) as to the trial evidence supposedly amounting to "forcible compulsion."

whether-reasonable-jurists-debate-due-process-clause-standards-jackson-v-virginia-in-re-winship