1. ) Was Petitioner prejudiced When Several Prospective furors
Withheld Crucial Information Pertaining To Employment As Law
Enforcement When Asked During Vior Dire, Resulting In Biased
Partial Jury SeatednAnd Empaneled. Violation U.S.C.A. Const. £

2. ) Abuse Of Discretion By Seating Improperly Impanelled Police
Officer On Jury Over Petitioner's Objections Insisting He Had
StrickennSaid Juror. Violation U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 6

3. ) Was Petitioner Wrongfully Convicted Of Intoxicated Assault
Penal Code 49.07 When Toxicology Blood Results Prove He Was In
Fact Not Intoxicated Or Impared. Supported By Expert Testimony.

4. ) Abuse Of Discretion For Twice permitting The Amending Of
Grand Jury Indictment Over Written Objections By petitioner .

5. ) Abuse Of Discretion By Trial Judge For Twice permitting all
Police Officers Who Testified To Not Produce Video Evidence
Requested VIA Defense Subpoena, In Both Trials Under same Cause.

6.) Trial Judge Abused His Discretion By Admitting Falsified
Prejudicial Video Into Trial Over Petitioner's Objection(s) and
Pleading(S) .

Was Petitioner Prejudiced When Several Prospective Jurors Withheld Crucial Information Pertaining To Employment As Law Enforcement When Asked During Voir Dire, Resulting In Biased Partial Jury Seated