Whether the District Court abused its discretion by failing to conduct an evidentiary hearing

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED QUESTION # ONE: Whether the District Court abused it's discretion by failing to conduct an evidentiary hearing by relying upon the . unsworn statements of trial lawyer Myers in which do not consti: _tute evidence, thus the lower court's denial conflicts with U.S. Supreme Court precedents in INS v. Phinpathya, 464 U.S. at 188 n. 6 (1984); and Blackledge v. Allison, 431 U.S. at 80-83 (1977) ? _ QUESTION # TWO: Whether the district court violated Rose v. Lundy, 455 U.S. 509, 520 (1982), by failing to address and issue a findings of fact and conclusion of law as to Petitioner's appellate ineffectiveness claim that Attorney Scheetz failed to raise a dead-bang "winner on his direct appeal proceedings in which would have resulted in reversal of his sentence on appeal ? QUESTION # THREE: Whether Petitioner Thomas's ex-trial counsel Attorney Meyer” failure to correct testimony which he knew was false or misleading constitutes ineffective assistance of counsel , in violation of his Sixth Amendment Rights of the U.S. Constitution ? . ; . QUESTION # FOUR: Whether. Petitioner Thomas, received ineffective assistance of counsel by Attorney Meyer failing to conduct an adequate background investigation, thus did Mr. Thomas's ex-trial counsel conduct his defense in a totally incompetent manner and that such incompetence prejudiced his defense in violation of his Sixth Amendment Rights of the U.S. Constitution ? : QUESTION # FIVE: Whether the U.S. Supreme Court ; should recogni. ze an argument not ‘raised before the district court as it is critical : ° issue affecting Thomas's substantial rights. Did Petitioner Thomas's ex-trial counsel operate pursuant to a conflict interest when, during the course of the representation, Attorney Meyer ‘is representation, counsel's and Petitioner's interests ‘diverge with respect to a material course of action,' thus his ex-trial counsel's continued representation of Thomas violate his Sixth Amendment Rights of the U.S. Constitution ? QUESTION SIX: Whether the U.S. Supreme Court should recognize an argument raised for the first time with the Eighth Circuit Court of appeals as it is a critical issue affecting Thomas's substa. ntial rights. Did Petitioner Thomas's ex-trial counsel provide him with ineffective assistance of counsel because Attorney Meyer did not fully advise him of a favorable plea offer; and the risks of going to trial versus pleading guilty, thus violating his Sixth , Amendment Rights during plea-negotiations stage of trial in the case herein ? . ,