Whether, as several circuits have found, there is a due process right not to be convicted based on forensic evidence later shown to be fundamentally unreliable, or, as the Alabama courts held, due process permits a conviction based on expert testimony that was later recanted and unanimously discredited having been debunked by intervening scientific developments.

Whether due process prohibits an appellate judge from participating in the appeal of a case the judge had actively litigated previously as counsel for one of the parties.

Whether due process prohibits a conviction based on forensic evidence later shown to be unreliable