Whether the petitioner should be granted remedial relief regarding the denial of his motion for the appointment of competent counsel presented in Appendix C?

ESTIONS PRESEUTED CouTENUED 8)) SHMULO PLATMEERE GaaYy Be CRAVTED REWENTAIy PSMOIOR REWGARTIG Yeu BANC POR THE Moumeurs PROENTED IN ATTATCHED NPRUDEX C, ? DiStesin "WE DESTRICT CeMT BE DEEMED BK wAve § HOLY SUOFEAL BLAS When qe ATED AS CULSEL Ta ASS 757 : Kameertenr COUNSEL EDR OSFEWIANTS By CORRECT THEE MEORSTONT GUMEEL Saye OSPOUMANTSS ILGNDZ UG, ERRye ey EMARROPR TA tp STA FCK ZUG THE ERPoONS Frieza, BE Coase a OGFEUDAES WITH KGCESMDL “Te PERLE NOIMeUTS TUE PROPEL LECH [JAS Timeeo rage FORTHE OFSWEICT COURT ThA ASC IEL ? WC AW AQGQUTS Denerct Counsel Re Okiclwawc; Depertineret fot Canetctins ond Bach Rtternlne, Law Lilotcrsy SUpeussafet Svery Facility Ploarntrtt Guo wes Vinod ct Dung the [Entire Quese ot the Latigataan ay ahas Cage et Berl BE |D&emeo Te HAVE MACTIC Tose y TINTRPER CEO) WE TH A SUST RESULT TY TTS QmeTTCULAZ CASE “Ey VEOLAT Zon) pr AQEQUNTE McESS TS COURTS ? WOES THe COMULET EVE ERS TH Turs CASE AT . [GN REQUTRG AM ABSOLUTE GUMTERE REVERSAL ? ay Did VYNERGIM Ghee proper Wyse deity dems YWeang tran Jreeroneric Bath © sazepes