Whether the petitioner's constitutional rights to a fair trial and effective assistance of counsel were violated

No question identified. : sour bo "CBI WWOD SHO PWIA) WALL PATZUST Le OFS KGL 28M LEPC THON AT PIT Ct 40 KOOULISHL YUL PIO FINBQI/F . YAILOMW JO COSI EY WL AE AFOFLICIN DWAL Wd ¥ a — $SFOD FO UL SYY %, aFIWUTEY FLL BWIA (voLDzsoed clad “TTT a ‘aSYD Samad sd Yl. wet CIVATPLICI OL WUC W AFI Jason Aavimzy CHIC] TaSIINGD yo CrONAIUSaNS ~OTTY CL ATMS AYP FL CW dIpPSCOUY7TIY AVI] ~AzdxOLY FL : . NM cng HWISDS WV SWPD DEL FIRLCI? PVAL WAV at AWAY Dy PMONAILISWOD ¢,QIVULIY HL AVION J2007 Wel ee ad = “IL a ‘ONIL Fill Ue AVIWLMOdd Y AVIDAY AZBIAN Sif PUN FASJO S,VAIVIP KIVIOLMLY VV , SPO DWIS Fill JO [VOISIN GE, FYVMTYD FET (VOBPIIS ONS BLL (LOD IPIVON Ul FIB_CA JUL S AIVOLLLEL UL BIO ; AMS SO SHALL YL SW AYE WAS S7IEWUA GIS TOOL ee BN FHI YL CIOS MB ALOLLWL JP AV WAY FLL (WY SW CIOnY & FGA AL YS AMY ‘SsIIe%d 3NG PISW OL “FPGA PULAU CY WL Bt VOL SIMDIY — Se700%d sng saarvouLlsd Wl Dvr 29000 Wve me a TD GSLNASadd (S)NOLLSAND , ? TL WERE WWE PETITIONERS CONSTITRIIOWAL RIGHTS 72 A FAR FRIAC AND EFFECTWE ASSISTANCE OF Counset Violated WHERE DEFENSE. CounSEL REFUSED 72 THw7EeR vier aR CAL ANY oF Hid CLIET'S FOdRT EEN WITVESSES TO TESTIFY On) His BEHALF, Covnsél FAILED Fo EntéR PICTURES OR ANY OTHER FUIDEWCE On Hes Citas BEHALF, FAILED To LMPEACA THe ComPlAnsAnT wit REPARTS And TRAWscR PTS, WHERE THE Com PLAuwTHAT'S RECORP HAD TS BE tuPED CLEAN, AS WELL AS FAMED 70 PROPERLY CHALLAPLE Ro SECUTIOS‘S CASE WW) Aw OTHER bay. MX WERE THE PeTTonER’s ComsTTuTionAl RIGHTS 72 A FAR TRIAL Ce VIOLATED. HERE THE Récorping () OF ALEGED. EUDESCE. 9.0 AGAwstHim wERE ERASED, And WwAHeee THE Cover ABUSED ITS Disererions BY REFUSING DEFEUSE THE ComPLAMTANT'S RECORDS OF Séxwnl ActiViTY To PRove THE ORIG) OF HER SEXUALLY FRansmeHED Disease, SCE NETHER THE PETITIONER Noe . Hs WiFE, THE CoMPLAMANTS PITHER, HAvE Wo Hisiary oF : SAID DISEASES.