Whether Petitioner was deprived of compulsory process under the Due Process Clause and Compulsory Process Clause

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED IL Whether Petitioner was deprived of compulsory process under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment and the Compulsory Process Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution where Petitioner filed applications for writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum to compel the production of defense witnesses Castle and Ely at Petitioner's trial; where, in response to the applications, the district court sua sponte ordered the government to issue Attorney Special Requests ("ASRs") to the U. S. Marshal to produce defense witnesses Castle and Ely at Petitioner's trial; where defense witness Ely was not produced at Petitioner's trial; where mistake of fact and/or mistake of law provided the basis for Ely's non production; where the district court failed to enforce its order to produce defense witness Ely at Petitioner's trial; and whether review should be de novo under Rule 51(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure; or whether the district court plainly erred under Rule 52(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure? II. Whether the district court abused its discretion in denying Petitioner's motion to continue trial to secure the production of Petitioner's only favorable and material witness? ii