Whether reasonable jurist would debate that the State failed to meet its burden of proof of beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Kirsh is guilt

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED 1. Whether reasonable jurist would debate that the State failed to meet its burden of proof of beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Kirsh is guilt. 2. Reasonable jurists would determined that Mr. Kirsh's convictions for Attempted Aggravated Obstruction of a Highway of Commerce and Aggravated Flight from an Officer would violate the prohibition against Double Jeopardy. 3. Whether reasonable jurists would determine that it was reversible error for the district court to permit Mr. Kirsh's involuntary statements that were the product of duress, inducements, and/or promises to be presented to the jury, over defense counsel's objections.