A jury convicted Feliz Vega of armed robbery and fleeing after rejecting his involuntary-intoxication defense, which depended on competing expert testimony. A habeas court later granted relief, finding that trial counsel mishandled expert evidence and appellate counsel should have raised those problems. The Supreme Court of Georgia rejected the grounds on which relief had been granted: those expert-related objections did not warrant relief under the standards for ineffective assistance of counsel. It reversed in part and vacated in part rather than finally denying every habeas claim. The habeas court must still decide issues it had left unresolved, including whether counsel improperly failed to challenge impeachment of an expert and whether Vega received inadequate advice about a plea offer. The ruling separates rejected ineffective-assistance theories from claims still awaiting an initial decision.