Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the district court's decisions

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the district court’s decision to deny the renewed motion for a new trial and in refusing to conduct an evidentiary based on the government’s failure to comply with Brady and the trial court’s discovery order; to disclose impeachment evidence; and to correct known false testimony? 2. Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the district court’s decision not to give lesser-included offense instructions that were supported by the facts and by not giving the proffered “purpose” instruction as it relates to the elements of 18 U.S.C. § 1959? 3. Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the district court’s denial of Petitioner’s mistrial motions when the government repeatedly presented evidence that Petitioner participated in an uncharged murder in violation of the trial court’s Order prohibiting the admission of any such evidence in its entirety? 4. Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the district court’s decision to admit evidence that Petitioner was involved in an uncharged murder as such evidence was inadmissible under Rule 403 and 404(b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence? 5. Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the district court’s decision to deny a severance of defendants to Benitez, Castillo, and Petitioner where Guevara presented an irreconcilable, mutually exclusive and antagonistic ii defense: advocating for the convictions of his co-defendants so that he would be acquitted? 6. Whether a mandatory sentence of life without parole violates the Eight Amendment, given Petitioner’s age and relative culpability?