Whether counsel's ineffectiveness conflicts with the holding in Missouri v. Frye

QUESTIONS PRESENTED (1) WHETHER COUNSEL'S INEFFECTIVENESS CONFLICTS WITH THE. HOLDING IN MISSOURI v FRYE, FOR FAILING TO ADVISE PETITIONER OF THE MEANS TO SET FORTH IN THE DEATH PENALTY PROTOCOL WHERE THE PLEA AGREEMENT ESSENTIALLY MISTAKEN HIS EXPOSURE TO THE DEATH PENALTY. . (2) WHETHER THE LOWER COURT'S REJECTION OF THE PETITIONER'S REQUEST FOR A COA ON HIS CLAIM THAT HIS ATTORNEY LABORED : UNDER A CONFLICT OF INTEREST, BASED ON HIS PRIOR REPRESEN TATION OF A(N) ALLEGED CO-CONSPIRATOR. (3) WHETHER THE GOVERNMENT'S EGREGIOUS CONDUCT CONFLICT'S WITH THR HOLDING IN UNITED STATES v BRADY, WHERE PETITIONER WAS MISINFORMED AS TO A CRUCIAL ASPECT OF HIS PLEA. (4) WHETHER PETITIONER'S SECOND ATTORNEY NON-APPEARANCE DURING PLEA PROCESS WAS EQUIVALENT TO THE CONSTRUCTIVE DENIAL OF THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL, WHEN THE APPLICATION OF 18 USC § 3005 ENTITLES PETITIONER TO THE ASSISTANCE OF TWO ATTORNEYS UPON INDICTMENT WHERE PETITIONER WAS CHARGED WITH A CAPITAL . CRIME? : _4 ALL PARTIES APPEAR IN THE CAPTION COVER PAGE ~ii_ : cy eo oo ° . oo : “a :