Consistent with the Fourteenth Amendment and Chapman v. California, could the harmless error analysis applied by the State as to the self-defense jury instruction been improperly and incorrectly applied?

QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 1. Consistent with the Fourteenth Amendment and Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 87 S.Ct. 824, 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967) could the harmless error analysis applied by the State as to the self-defense jury instruction been improperly and incorrectly applied? 2. Could a claim be considered exhausted even though it did not specifically cite a federal question? 3. Consistent with the Fourteenth Amendment, Sixth Amendment, and Darden v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 168, 181, 106 S.Ct. 2464, 2471, 91 L.Ed.2d 144 (1986), did the Middle District Court and consequently the Eleventh Circuit for the United States District Court and United States Appellate Court respectively misapplied the law and facts to the issue of prejudicial misconduct during closing arguments? 4. Consistent with the Fourteenth Amendment and Sixth Amendment did the Middle District Court and consequently the Eleventh Circuit for the United States District Court and United States Appellate Court respectively . misapplied the law and facts to the issue of allowing the defense’s expert witness to testify? 5. Consistent with the Fourteenth Amendment and Sixth Amendment did the Middle District Court and consequently the Eleventh Circuit for the United States District Court and United States Appellate Court respectively misapplied the law and facts to the issue of exclude evidence of the victims drug withdrawals that caused him to act aggressively? 2 PARTIES WHOSE JUDGMENT IS SOUGHT TO BE REVIEWED AND