I.
WHETHER THE SPECAL CIRCUMSTANCE AND GANG EVIDENCE ARE
UNSUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, DENYING PETITIONER
DUE PROCESS OF LAW.

II.
WHETHER THE COURT ERRED IN DENYING PETITIONER'S MOTION TO
SUPPRESS ALL FRUITS OF HIS ARRESTS (NOTABLY HIS 2013
STATEMENT TO THE INFORMANT ) ON GROUNDS OF UNLAWFUL
ARRESTS, WIRETAP VIDLATIONS,
, DENYING PETITIONER WIS RIGHTS
UNDER FOURTH AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS.

III.
WHETHER, DESPITE MASSIAH AND PERKINS, THE COURTS FURTHER
ERRED IN DENYINE PETITIONER'S MUTION TD EXCUDE HIS ORCHESTRATED
JAIL CELL STATEMENT UNDER THE FIFTH, SIXTH, AND FOURTEENTH
AMENDMENTS AS WELL.

IV.
WHETHER ADMISSION OF EXCESSIVE AND NEEDLESS GANG EVIDENCE
0
AISO RESULTED IN GROSS TRIAL UNFAIRNESS AND DENIAL OF DUE
PROCESS, A FAIR TRIAL AND THE RIGHT TO CONFRONT GANG EXPERT'S
TESTIMONIAL HEARSAY.

V.
WHETHER THE INSTRUCTION ON THE MULTIPLE MURDER SPECIAL
CIRCUMSTANCE FAILED TO CLARIFY THAT THE DEFENDANT MUST KILL
OR INTEND TO KILL EACH VICTIM, DENYING PETITIONER DUE PRDCESS
OF LAW AND THE RIGHT TO A JURY DETERMINATION ON ALL ISSUES,

VI.
WHETHER THE COURT ERRED IN DENVING PETITIDNER'S MOTION FOR
A NEW TRIAL, DENYING APPELLANT DUE PROUESS, A FAIR TRIAL,
AND THE RIGHT TO EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL.

VII.
WHETHER THE WUMULATIVE EFFECT OF THE ERRDRS DISCUSSED
ABOVE DEPRIVEO PETITIONER OF DUE PROCESS OF LAW AND A
FAIR TRIAL BY AN IMPARTIAL JURY AND REQUIRES REVERSAL OF
THE JUPEEMENT.

Whether the cumulative effect of the errors discussed above deprived petitioner of due process of law and a fair trial by an impartial jury and requires reversal of the judgement