Whether the district court erred in failing to consider Petitioner's claim under the Abstention Doctrine, YOUNGER-V-HARRIS

QUESTIONS PRESENTED — ‘ 1, Whether the district court erred in failing to consider Petitioner's claim under the Abstention Doctrine, YOUNGER V_HARRI8 40)..0S 37 (1971), Prosecution was taken in bad faith without hope of obtaining a valid conviction, PEREZ V LEDESMA 401 US 82(1971); Explained in PAREDES V ATHERTON (2000, CAl10 Colo) 224 F3rd 1160. : . 2. Whether the district court erred that petitioner has not exhausted Temedy per Tithe 28 USC §2254 (by(1),(B)(i)-(1i) and whether extraordinary circumstances exist which would require interference per PHILLIPS V WOODFORD (2001) 267 F3rd 955. t . PARTIES “TO THE” PROCEEDING +°Al1 parties“in the caption of the case on the cover page. Petitioner Pedro Rodriguez is a Califernia Prisener,who was sentenced: ; te a :prisen term-of 13 Years‘4 Menths’ follewing a jury trial in San Diego ’ . Ceunty ° i : Respondent Matt Grece Is the District Attorney deputy for San Diege “County where Rodriguez was-~ being incarcerated at the relevant times. Li “TABLE OF ‘CONTENTS QUESTIONS PRESENTED... ‘PARTIES TO-THE PROCEEDINGS...