Canales v. Lumpkin

(1) Whether, for penalty-phase ineffective assistance of counsel violations, Harrington v. Richter "established a substantial likelihood standard for evaluating prejudice" that exceeds the standard in Wiggins v. Smith of a "reasonable probability that at least one juror would have struck a different balance" on whether to punish by death; and (2) whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit"s failure to "reweigh the evidence in aggravation against the totality of available mitigating evidence" conflicts with Wiggins and Andrus v. Texas.