Whether the Court's 'equitable' ruling permits Texas prisoners to avoid the successive requirements found at 28 U.S.C. § 2244(a) and (b) regarding prior §2254 applications for a writ of habeas corpus, by invoking the exception to the general rules of procedural default as stated in Trevino v. Thaler, 569 US 413 (2013) and Martinez v. Ryan, 566 US 1 (2012)?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1) Whether the Court's 'equitable' ruling permits Texas prisoners to avoid the successive requirements found at 28 U.S.C. § 2244(a) and (b) regarding prior §2254 applications for a writ of habeas corpus, by invoking the exception to the general rules of procedural default a& stated in Trevino v. Thaler, 569 US 413 (2013) and Martinez v. Ryan, 566 US 1 (2012)? 2) Whether trial counsel renders constitutional performance by proceeding to the punishment trial only 45 minutes after the guilty verdict under the circumstance of this Particular case? 3) thether™the-fourt should presume prejudice when trial counsel decides to not present mitigation factors without making a mitigation investigation? ii