Whether reasonable jurist would find that the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, every essential dement of the offense that Mr. Johnson had committed Aggravated Rape of CF

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether reasonable jurist would find that the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, every essential dement of the offense that Mr. Johnson had committed Aggravated Rape of CF. Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. 2. Whether reasonable would find that the trial court erred in the defense counsel's Motion to Suppress the “partially inaudible” telephone into evidence. First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments te the United States Constitution; Article 153 of the Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure; and, Section 605 of the Federal Communications Act. 3. Whether reasonable jurist would find that Mr. Johnson was denied the right to a fair and impartial trial by jury when the State was allowed to strike two African-American prospective jurors. Batson y. K entucty, 476 US. 79, 106 §.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986). 4. Whether jurists of reason would debate that Mr. Johnson was denied Equal Protection of the law when the district court accepted the non-unanimous verdict of guilt by the jury. Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. 5. Whether reasonable jurists would determine that Mr. Johnsen was convicted with the unreliable “expert” testimony which fails to meet the threshold of the Daubert test for scientific validity. Daxbert v. Dow Pharmaceuticals: Fry ev, United States. T. #384076\Johnson Trevor ushabwrt.odt INTERESTED PARTIES District Attorney's Office 22™ Judicial District Court 701 N. Columbia St. Covington, LA 70433 Darrel Vannoy, Warden Louisiana State Penitentiary General Delivery Angola, LA 70712 \WMendos\ICs\[p -deanstancesoy T. #384076\Johnson Trevor ushabwrt.odt