Was the state's use of the complaining witness's name specifically as the victim a violation of presumption of innocence, Supreme Court precedent, United States Constitutional violation, due process and Sixth Amendment violation?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 4) WAS THE STATES USE OF THE COMPLAINING WITNESSES NAME SPECIFICALLY AS THE VICTIM A VIOLATION OF PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE, SUPREME COURT PRECEDENT, UNITED STATES CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATION, DUE PROCESS AND SIXTH AMENDMENT VIOLATION? 2) WAS PETIBIONERS RIGHT TO COUNSEL VIOLATED WHEN PETITIONER"S ATTORNEY ALLOWED IN EXTRANEQUS OFFENSE EVIDENCE? HE SPECIFICALLY FILED MOTIONS TO KEEP IN VIOLATION STATE STATUTORY LAW 403, UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION 6 AMENDMENT. 3) WAS PETITIONER'S ATTORNEY INEFFECTIVE FOR FAILING TO OBJECT TO THREE WITNESSES WHO DID TESTIFY UNDER 403? BUT OBJECTED TO 403 ; TO THE ONE WITNESS WHO DID NOT TESTIFY. SUPREME COURT PRECEDENT UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION AMENDMENT 6. ~ ) WAS PETITIONERS APPEAL ATTORNEY INEFFECTIVE FOR FAILING:TO CITE ANY CONTROLLING AUTHORITY ON PETITIONER*S DIRECT APPEAL? IN VIOLATION OF STH CIRCUIT PRECEDENT, UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION AMENDMENT 6? ii.