Whether the Arizona state courts violated the petitioner's due process rights by denying his post-conviction claims despite a lack of physical evidence supporting his conviction

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED I. Dick Aci zona Stade Terral Conet Mecrcopo, County Sue toc Cont Commissioner (ichordl L. Nothwelv, comank \lonitbaal wo COOLS histedcally as rial ang! in Eviclertary Past -Conviction Precedings cing | Ta was lavrancl damplese” whan satoet was NoT, 5 uppordey . bythe cecal established in presente of tral Court — Physica | feroance. pno\ Moarerial Jacks ot actual esa was Scdjoresset Om 7A! QS Sbstenttal pre jydice Violotmo, Due Prouss regutre ments 4o uinatdoptalolg ies wiplading Stak é 7 2. Drd Aczona Hode Rexeutna Cou ofyuse +o oleHem ing: Baa Courts. iasertrovia| in seror alone of deeb ye oa pecgueous culkin Corr cad @ rshang + rva | was Nor fat Ndr Complete where Hale tial e Sleeve? aplnrd oi Cowes Sopire sin “physical vin plate evelenté ae) a CUSIAY ancl Desechine Wansiin Beery iNoleatsolint agllechon a Javestaadions Ino the vinplode te 4o a legal title ; PREVENTING pprope me Cours a ctren neice pe "We Bocass i! Contre tatto _ Mr Compulsory Process, andl Equal Protech of Fi w Clauses da the Un eo Stones Constacey ancl CHGLONEOL U.S. Supreme Concer Precedand $ . 3, does Shi Getual wircumstanes of thes Cayse preseatée] | andl supported \p 4 the exhibirerd recowls Provicle Hw Unrle Stales Supreme Cours \ucispeucleneeto enforce. Corrective legal 7 Geceuglen ora wilh old Soe Courts a Acourdeble, or toa sneVent Aelomdiugly,as a resubol improprretes, qlertedts and coe egien \ st & lear sastanha) Linda mental conten Davi niet S4 nprrmd Cover Precectent anpl U : Consttutre provisions 2 : a of Un