What is the test for denying collateral review because of a petitioner's failure to raise an issue on direct appeal?

In assessing the contours of a state court's denial of collateral review because of a petitioner's failure to raise an issue on direct appeal, we focus on the second of the Cotto guideposts. See, e.g., Clark v. Perez, 510 F.3d 382, 391-92 (2d Cir. 2008). "The second Cotto factor considers whether state case law indicates that compliance with a procedural rule was required under the specific circumstances of the case." Id. at 392 (emphasis added). Here, the state court based its decision on the procedural rule articulated in 440.10(2)(c). Section 440.10(2)(c) requires the state court to deny a motion to vacate a judgment when, "[a]lthough sufficient facts appear on the record of the proceedings underlying the judgment to have permitted, upon appeal from such judgment, adequate review of the ground or issue raised upon the motion, no such appellate review or determination occurred owing to the defendant's unjustifiable failure [to raise

Page 9