Whether the government's defense, jury instructions, and denial of counsel were prejudicial to the defendant

QUESTIONS PRESENTED , (1) WHETHER THE GOVERNMENT'S UNAVAILING DEFENSE OF THE INDEFENSIBLE, WITH RESPECT TO THE INDICTMENT, INADEQUATE JURY INSTRUCTIONS, AND THE CONSTRUCTIVE DENIAL OF COUNSEL, WERE CLEARLY PREJUDICIAL TO DAVID LOPEZ, FOR WHICH BY ANY STANDARD OF REVIEW, THE COURT SHOULD FIND DEFENDANT'S COUNSEL'S PERFORMANCE, HOPELESSLY DEFICIENT, BORDERING ON CONSTRUCTIVE DENIAL OF COUNSEL-A STRUCTURAL ERROR. (2) WHETHER DAVID LOPEZ'S INVOCATION OF ACTUAL INNOCENCE, AND THE CAUSE AND EFFECT DOCTRINE, ALLOWS THE SUPREME COURT TO ENTERTAIN ANY PROCEDURALLY CLAIMS NOT RAISED ON DIRECT APPEAL. (3) WHETHER BY REASON OF THE NUMEROUS CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATIONS COMMITTED BY THE DISTRICT COURT, IT EFFECTIVELY LOST SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION AND THE POWERS GRANTED IT BY CONGRESS UNDER 28 U.S.C. 3231 TO TRY DAVID LOPEZ. .