Whether the state violated the petitioner's constitutional rights under the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments

No question identified. : 7 Questons Presented For Review 4. Whether the Stnte violated Story’s Forth, and Four~ Feenth, Amendment Constitutional rights, When the Waco Police lied on «a Affidavit for Arrest Warrant. Recording +o Franks v. Delaware 4% S.Ct AbTH 4. Whether the strte violated Storys Fifth, and Sixth Rmendment, Constitubonal rights. When the Strte obtain Storys Conviction theough Frise, And Enbricated evidence. , Phrough the State's Primacy, WitNess testimony, Recording to _Napue Vv. Lilinots 79 S.C+ 1173 . 3. Whether the strate violated storys , Sixth Amendinent tight te Effective Assistance of Counsel, Whew Counse | friled fo Consult with Medical expert. According to Harrington Vv. Richter i3i S.C+ 770 3 4. Whether the State Violated Stery's Fifth, rand Sixth Pmen™ dment Constitutional rights, When the State Suppress Favorable. Evidence, According +o Giglio v. United States 92 S.Ct 763 5. Whether the State Violated Stocys , Fitth , Sixth, And Four” teenth Constitutional rights. When The Court Dewied Stery A Meaningful OPPortunity “to Present m Complete clefense, Rec” ordiny to California v. Trombetra 104 S;Ct A528 6. Whether the Strte violrted Story's Sixth, and fourteenth Constitutional right, When the Court “Dewied RB Motion For Speedy Trial, Accorcling to Barker v. Wingo AR S.ce alsa Parties to Proceeding Lorie Davis , TOCT Director Edward Marshall Counse| Susan Miquel Counsel Allan Story Petttoner TT, | Ble of Contents OPinions Below, 1. Jurisdiction, . a. Constitutional and Statutory Provisions involved, ArH, Statement of the crse, 35¢ ArqueMent, 6~ dO. Reasons for granting the Writ, . 23, Conc] usion. . AN. Tudex to Appendices