The transcripts are available in the three habeas cases heard today.
I skimmed through them. And now I am feeling down. I don't think that petitioner is going to win any of these cases. At the risk of moving into "famous last words" territory, at least these cases won't make life worse for habeas petitioners.
I think I can some up each of them in a sentence:
Maples - even with the extraordinary facts, they aren't extraordinary enough to excuse the procedural default
Martinez - it would just be too difficult as a practical matter to create the right to the effective assistance of counsel in a collateral proceeding
Fields - it is not clearly established law that being in prison means you are "in custody"*
*Okay, that was an intentionally absurd oversimplification. But not too far off. Here's the more accurate sentence: it was not clearly established law that an inmate is "in custody" for Miranda purposes when police officers separate him from the general population in order to question him about a crime.