Whether the Mississippi Supreme Court's refusal to apply this Court's precedent in McWilliams v. Dunn, 582 U.S. 183 (2017), which clarified that Ake v. Oklahoma, 470 U.S. 68 (1985), requires that an indigent capital defendant receive access to a mental health expert who is sufficiently available to the defense and independent from the prosecution, violated Petitioner's due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment.

Whether the Sixth Amendment, as clarified in McWilliams v. Dunn, requires that an indigent capital defendant receive access to a mental health expert who is independent from the prosecution and sufficiently available to the defense to effectively assist in the evaluation, preparation, and presentation of mitigation evidence, and whether a state court's refusal to apply this clearly established law to a successive postconviction petition in the absence of an adequate and independent state procedural bar violates due process