Martin v. Johnson

Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit violated the backward-looking nature of Section 2254(d) of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 and the clear mandates announced by the Supreme Court in Sexton v. Beaudreaux, Cullen v. Pinholster, and Harrington v. Richter when it considered " and based its ultimate decision upon " an argument the respondent, Alonzo Cortez Johnson, never made to the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals on direct appeal.