Whether the defendant's due process rights were violated by the trial court's failure to conduct a competency hearing despite evidence of the defendant's mental unfitness

No question identified. : faom-or! at . -" Ora Sinvar beic€ cava Oroteckions. Pose. wists is a [direct GPReal From de Dudgemen* of he Coorh below-wo issues ig Caised Charendim§ the Chansing : Stra mens (Payne Was Senlenced ko Natural Life iw the Liles deParkpmest of Covrechions for Owe of the Clicsk de cree. Murder Conviction und Copsective term of imPrisonment of leo years for ne atkerr?t murder Convichow) Page #Zidcllendart aricnool<ed3esS that While Mis issue wa4s TaiSed im [Oven Court CieneS6 ik LOGS Nek iIncwacd iN Lhe Posh Fea Motion. Pose 77, Counser Voiced Concerns Tedarding defend -ant Continued fitness for triat based on defendants’ in Couch Staltements as wert as Counseis’ obServadien of defendant dovling Conversabion with him. Pase 1g, Ceuaser argued . MEL G@akion in Whe form of Aetendants’ Wissory of Mentat Tunes and this Strange ackions during he Procecdind in this Casele zou) Case #25thus the Fack Hat defenaank didnot object ta Mae ; bedi Cienk Fitness Proceeding in Uctviat Court is no bar this : Covfrts Consiaeration o¥ the iSSUL Novo ON aP Cea, Page #37. arlthoogh this error was not Preserved. Under dhe hearsay Plein erlvor vor , Paver 42, defense Counser did ebsect do any of The OF for Cmention Comments and Unis issue wes nok inctuded in Hhe mlotion trial. Pade 2, defendant did not object bo Mhe aboreviolked E bness hearin in Me Wiar Courk. Pase 224 brian Counsets’ ConjCerns about detendants’ Filness were Grthee Corroborated by nal endants’ behavior at diat, at one Point detendank made a S4q bemen on the record Hat it had been Catea to hig attendHen eh ) ESP awisk (Q436-37) | Page isk ot Qc. ide eS | #2 . x4 ar Parbies a? Peaw Tn re Cavphion of dhe Case on Uc Lover Page | Page | TTaloic. 2 F Conbe wi. #3, | . OMnyeENS bevews A. DUrisdichion 42. Constki yobieda and Statotecy Previsioas invowcd # 3+ Teasons for Qranting Mae tovit “§, Cenclusion £48 } Au, PPenidiy As notice of aPeal was Hmey Ficcd on February 22,22 (cue). March 4, 2018 Coyote). afPic med Your Conviction and |Sentence by Me afferrate Courk. Marth 27,2019 for ce hnearindMh = Wis APriL 14,2018 denied PehearinS, oPPendiv Ra. Edyo on Payne Was Sentenced Junvary 13; 2012 (344) He mobion oe fe} Consider Sentence was Grad on Feproary 10,2012, (403-04). andi Was dented on Feloroary 24,2012» a20eadixG. dne SoPceme Court today denied the Lewes to a? eat Sephember 26,2018, gePendix. LL Where no Provisions “in Maw SoPreme Court Cules For FlUinaa Peki lion fr Cehearin’ on the deniat of a Petition fr Leawe. ko laPPear besore to attach a Cofy of his Court denial order to |Your’ Pelion fer ustlk of CerMoracie Me Clerk. Obiober V2 4 2018. | | , | Page € A +A cis < wSeSt PeoPle-Us$-hangSon WLELCL Zd 212, 213 (2a04) Puse #3, _ h to ke ignd r3ces SLL Conk. Of 1470. arb. 1 BZ: U.S. Cont, amend x14 Const: Gmends U.S. Soh. HLGI5 (AY Pade #29 Pege | pOinions pero dovrisditbien i x] for Cades ftom state Courts? Hhe OPinion of he highest state Court to review Bra merits GPrears at