Stirling v. Williams

Whether a state court is objectively unreasonable, for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1), when it concludes that a capital defendant was not prejudiced by his counsel"s failure to introduce evidence that a federal habeas court concludes is a "double-edged sword" that might "indicate future dangerousness" and which counsel may well choose not to introduce in any further proceedings.