Reid’s contrary testimony. These findings are not clearly erroneous. And, in light of these findings, this aspect of Reid’s challenge to counsel’s effectiveness must fail. IV. Reid next contends that because he did not understand what an Alford plea was or that he could face the death penalty under such a plea, his plea was not knowing and voluntary. Reid faults the trial court for failing to inquire adequately into whether Reid understood the charges against him and for not assessing the impact of Reid’s mental deficiencies on his competence to plead guilty. Reid presented this claim for the first time in his state habeas petition, and the Virginia Supreme Court concluded that the claim was defaulted under the rule of Slayton v. Parrigan, 215 Va. 27, 205 S.E.2d 680, 682 (1974) (<HOLDING>). Absent cause and prejudice or a miscarriage
holding that a claim not raised before the trial court will not be considered for the first time on appeal holding that issues raised for the first time on appeal will not be considered holding claims must be raised on direct appeal or waived holding that an issue raised for the first time on appeal will not be considered by this court holding that claims not properly raised on direct appeal will not be considered as a basis for collateral relief