Whether the federal district & circuit court and the Florida State courts violated the Petitioner's 6th-&-14th-Amendment-rights

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Question one: Whether the federal district & circuit court and the Florida State courts violated the Petitioner’s 6 & 14° Amendment rights—when they failed to apply the plain language in Martinez v. Ryan, 566 U.S. 1, 132 S.Ct. 1309 (3/20/2012); Trevino v. Thaler, 569 U.S. __, 133 S.Ct. 1911 (5/28/2013), and Edwards v. Carpenter, 529 U.S. 446, 120 S.Ct. 1587 (2000) to address the merits of the Petitioner’s ineffective assistance of counsel claims and prosecutor & trial Court issues for procedural default reasons which resulted in a miscarriage of justice? Question two: Whether the Petitioner's due process and sixth amendment vights were violated when the trial counsel, appellate counsel and the court failed to apply the standards for bias jury members found in Smith v. Phillips, 455 U.S. 209, 102 S.Ct. 940 (1982); Remmer v. U.S., 350 U.S. 377, 76 S.Ct. 425 (1956); U.S. v. Wood, 299 U.S. 123 (1937)? Question three: Whether the trial judge violated Petitioner’s constitutional ) rights by enhancing the sentence beyond the signed scoresheet sentence (20 years, App. 19) for all nine charges and by overstepping his authority by disallowing the ; jury to be involved or to consider the recommended scoresheet causing Petitioner’s . right of trial by jury to be denied? , Question four: Whether the trial judge violated Petitioner’s rights when he established a rule (R. 91, App. 98-99) that disallowed defense counse) from inquiring the accusers on cross-exam in order to show one of the accusers was the Page ii of viii person committing the acts charged against the innocent Petitioner? Question five: Whether the Petitioner’s rights were violated by the state ; and federal courts by not rendering a complete decision on the merits of each claim? Question six: Whether the State of Florida’s statutes governing sexual battery can administer a capitol sentence of life with only a six person jury when a murderer obtains the exact same sentence but with a twelve person jury, thus violating the constitutional rights of the offender and rendering an illegal ’ conviction? Question seven: Whether a conviction can be upheld with only the accusers claiming an offense when others were present and testified they did not see any ; offense and where there is no factual evidence existing beyond the allegation and where there’s no eye witnesses, and no admittance by the petitioner thus resulting in malicious prosecution, an miscarriage of justice? PARTIES TO THIS PROCEEDING The parties to this proceeding are as follows: 1. Mark S. Inch, Secretary of the Department of Corrections. 2. Ashley Moody, Attorney General of the State of Florida. . 3. Thomas F. Williams, the Petitioner. . Page iii of viii QUESTIONS