Whether it violates the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment for a state trier of fact to convict petitioners where the evidence cannot fairly be considered sufficient to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt require reversal of the conviction on the ground of insufficient evidence

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether it violates the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment for a state trier of fact to convict petitioners where the evidence cannot fairly be considered sufficient to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt require reversal of the conviction on the ground of insufficient evidence. 2. Is petitioner entitled to Habeas Corpus relief. If this court found, no rational trier of fact could have found proof, of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. 3. Should petitioner’s conviction be vacated, because it violated the Winship doctrine of reasonable doubt, and Thompson vs. Louisville. No evidence rule. 4. Petitioner filed a successive Habeas Corpus. In the state and federal court’s he claims that he was being held in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States. Should the state court and Federal court have entertained petitioners Habeas Corpus. _ i