Whether the district court erred in granting summary judgment against the appellant when there are material, unresolved facts in dispute

ISSUES PRESENTED 1. Whether Or Not The DISTRICT COURT erred And Abused Its Discretion In Granting SUMMARY JUDGMENT Against Appellant When There Patently Exist Material, Unresolved Facts Still In Dispute. II. Whether Or Not The District Court erred In Granting SUMMARY JUDGMENT Against Appellant When There Exist "NEWLY DISCOVERED EVIDENCE" Of RECANTATION From State's Key Witness That Contain Exculpatory Evidence That Negate's Validity Of State's Entire Case. III. Whether Or Not The DISTRICT COURT Erred And Abused Its Discretion In Rejecting Appellant's "INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE" Claim, When "NEWLY DISCOVERED EVIDENCE" Of RECANTATION From State's Key Witness Reveals Exculpatory Evidence That Corroborate's Appellant's And Defense Witnesses Version Of The Events. IV. Whether Or Not The DISTRICT COURT Erred In Granting Summary Judgment Against Appellant's Claim Of INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL, When Counsel Proffered "NO EXPLANATION" For His Malfeasance And Nonfeasance. V. Whether Or Not The DISTRICT COURT Erred And Abused Its ; Discretion In Granting Summary Judgment Against Appellant When Due Process And The Interest Of Justice Warranted An ; Evidentiary Hearing To Resolve Exculpatory "“RECANTED" Statement From State's Key Witness That Nullifies Prior Inculpatory Statements That Contributed To Conviction. : VI. Whether Or Not DISTRICT COURT Erred And Abused Its iscretion For DISREGARDING Witness Testimony, ; CORROBORATED by 'RECANTED' Testimony Of State's Key . Witness, When The Same Establishes Appellant's Innocence Of the charged Offense. ‘ VII. Whether Or Not, In Light Of "Newly Discovered Evidence" Of : RECANTEDR Exculpatory Statements Of State's Key Witness, Any Jury, Acting Reasonable, Would Have Convicted Of The Charged Offense. . ee VIII. qnether Or Not The Court Of Appeals Erred In Not Granting