Did petitioner make an involuntarily unknown and unintelligent plea through ineffective assistance of counsel and violations of his 6th Amendment right to due process protected under the United States Constitution, creating structural error not subject to harmless error?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED | 1. Idaho State Supreme Court * Continued” . 2 . -Post Conviction on Appeg!|: 3. . + B/. Did petitioner make @ involuntarily unkown anc! s Un-inte lligent pleo Theough inetRective assistance ol ; r3 Counel ane’ Veole-tions of hes KO Amendnentright to 7. due-process protected uncler the United Stes Const, 8. creating STRUCTURAL ERROR rot subject to 9. harmless err. . 4s uC/ Diol Detense Counsel prosecection, and Out . ya. Violate petitioners s Bond Gt US. Cnt Amend, by 13 rebhsing ty coll eruciel witness % Give tectirmeny ; 4 that world Change out come of proceacling tb ; is actual innocence’. 16. vD/ Did the State Destrict Sentencing Courk Viokite 18 petitioners One Rocess when. relying on 9. 2 Rurrted PSI with out further sclise rent ; 26 of rights afer freecl by Dreat Gully uv Plea ancl other incducernents to Stte to Hs a-—-R4hifoner he-Cocele! remain Gent and fo r. Grek 3 with a PL investigator, or tl cet (epee w or aleo He cout bone dn Od FRE. Petition fr Writ of Certrorari Page 2. | 1, United States District Court Dist .of Iolaho (Boise) a. Cease No. I/17-cv-00109-ClD Turoly merit Jan. 0% 2g 3. Honorable Candly Gh. Dale United! Stes Py Magistrate duclge : 5 é.A/. Rettioners guilty plea ‘not a Keown or intelligent 7 Voluntary pleee . 3 BL Petitioners Conse! wees inetfechve Br Kiln to , 9. adequetely investagote tHe tects of te cose . 10 CL bid district Court err by oe nying motion WW. for cont lict fee counsel . . 12 . 12 D/ Violotions of a Federal Statue or amend. uncler the. m4 protection of the U.S. Const, By Regeoncleris Ere! Tahoe Sate tose. iS to the level of a ‘fundamental clefect that inherently resulled king complete ms Carriage oP justice tal wns incons stunt M7. wath the ruclrmentary olemands of har proceckire. )8. Rt; tioner asserts such violations are-congnizeble 14 because they are. ea conchtutronel magnitude and Her ao improprietres Created cw ban amentl_cun-fereness hat a! Woletec! petitionens He” Decent tight tb Lhe Hpecoxs. a This incluclas sth 6% mend, Oiblatong Creedting a 2 Structural Grovs» Theft rf clei! te be Petition fe Wt of Cortiorari Page % __ _.. QUESTIONS PRESENTED.__ |. UNITED STATES Court of Appeals 9 Circuit ___. 2. No. 19-35232 ~ « Ar. Guilty by Forced Plea through; __ s. ignorance, incomprehension, coercion, terror, Subtle and. ¢. blatant treats Violating Petitioners fundamental _ righks._ebowin Rtitroner to unknowingly relinguish. s Ais baste right that te Framers o¥ eur Const. q. thought indispen sableCounsel's frarlure to coll witness that would ch sclose “detualinnocence.” all — u—congnizable to ineblue Assistance of Counsel” ya. > Substantial dental of hus. Conthituonal rights 2. resulting “Cteuctural Errors” oe a : ee ee w. BL FA Amendhnent Claina_Concerning , loess. he Statements Proseculsrial Misconduct Sign Peart Tedicial n Errors, Bias of Tuclge, Insut tres ent Evidence, forcecl__ 1. Guilty Pleo. to crime Retitioner old nat Gmmits beeen ae 4. _ wa Ch Use of Taned PSI obtzined inviolation a. of Rebtioners 5% anc BE Amend. RetecLion a under Sue process © Hructipal Error antl 3 pres wcice andl Innocert Man has been “ x. tmprisoppec! Through Tencherel Llores md a. Strneture! Crord Hat ase ret Gabjecl houmbess error. ~ Petition for Weit of Certiorari__ Page 5