Washington v. Mississippi

1. Whether the Mississippi Supreme Court’s decision, which held that a criminal defendant’s right to be present at all critical stages of his trial is not a fundamental right and can be waived by counsel’s failure to object, is contrary to, or involves an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States? 2. Whether the Mississippi Supreme Court’s decision, which held that a criminal defendant’s right to be present at all critical stages of his trial is not a fundamental right and can be waived by counsel’s failure to object, is based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding?