Page:Cruz v. Arizona (2023).pdf/1

(Slip Opinion)

(a) This Court does not decide a question of federal law in a case if the state-court judgment “rests on a state law ground that is independent of the federal question and adequate to support the judgment.” Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U. S. 722, 729. In this case the Court focuses on the requirement of adequacy; whether Arizona’s “state procedural ruling is adequate is itself a question of federal law.” Beard v. Kindler, 558 U. S. 53, 60. A state procedural ruling that is “ ‘firmly established and regularly followed’ ” will ordinarily “be adequate to