Pitchford v. Cain · ¶53

Put simply, Mr. Pitchford's account of a muzzled defense team is hard to square with the record. But even if it were a plausible account, that still would not be enough. Under § 2254(d)(2), a federal habeas petitioner must show not only that his version of events is plausible. He must show that the record “compel[s]” it. Rice v. Collins, 546 U. S. 333, 341 (2006). And no matter how generously one interprets the record in this case, that is a standard Mr. Pitchford cannot meet. It is just as reasonable, if not more so, to conclude that Mr. Pitchford's attorneys meant to “reserve” only the statistical argument they had made at step one—not a step three comparative juror argument they never mentioned at any point during jury selection or trial. 1 App. 175. Refecting as much, not only did the Mississippi Supreme Court read the record differently than Mr. Pitchford now does. The Fifth…

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.