Was the petitioner's right to a fair proceeding, effective assistance of counsel and due process violated?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED ; I. Was the Petitioner’s right to a fair proceeding, effective assistance of counsel and Due Process of law violated when trial counsel LeRonnie Mason failed to ' investigate the petitioner’s mental health history and retain a Mental Health expert for psychiatric evaluation? ; Il. Did first counsel Michael Takiff render ineffective assistance of counsel when he . failed to request a mental health determination whether petitioner was competent to proceed and/or insane at the time of the crimes, further violating her Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment right to a fair proceeding and Due Process of law? II. Was the Petitioner’s right to a fair proceeding, effective assistance of counsel and : Due Process of law violated when trial counsel failed to have petitioner evaluated by a mental health expert in support of insanity at the time of the . crime? IV. Did trial counsel render ineffective assistance of counsel when he misadvised petitioner to plead guilty while under the influence of psychotropic medication and that the petitioner’s plea was not knowing or voluntary based on fear and SO misapprehension which also violated the Petitioner’s right to a fair trial and due process of law? 7 ; V. Was trial counsel’s performance ineffective when he failed to investigate, prepare and inform Petitioner of viable defenses, violating Petitioner’s Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights? an VI. Was the Petitioner’s right to effective assistance of counsel, fair proceeding and ; Due Process of law violated when trial counsel waived the Petitioner’s right to a pre-sentence investigation and/or failing to present Mitigating factors during plea negotiation and sentencing phases as well as counsel being ineffective for failing to move for a downward departure? ' VII. Was counsel ineffective for failing to file a Motion to suppress Petitioner's statements, a violation of the Petitioner’s right to a fair proceeding, effective assistance of counsel and due process of law? VII. Did the trial court violate the Petitioner’s Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment right to a fair proceeding and Due Process of law when it denied appointing counsel to represent the Petitioner at her evidentiary hearing held on Post Conviction Motion? IX. Did counsel’s performance prove ineffective when he stipulated to a factual basis and when he failed to advise the Petitioner that the evidence against her was insufficient to support a charge of Second degree murder with a firearm and Robbery with a firearm, violating the Petitioner’s right to effective assistance of counsel, a fair proceeding and Due Process of law? X. Was the Petitioner’s Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments violated when Michael Takiff and LeRonnie Mason failed to have Petitioner’s case severed from her co-defendant’s? , XI. Did counsel render ineffective assistance when he failed to negotiate a . substantial assistance agreement with the State based on information she gave : that resulted in a confession by and conviction of her co-defendant, a violation of the Petitioner’s Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment right? a XII. Did counsel render ineffective assistance when he failed to investigate, request discovery, interview and/or depose witnesses and victims in case number ’ 2008CF001531A; a violation of the Petitioner’s Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment right? XIII. Was the Petitioner’s right to a fair proceeding, effective counsel and due process violated when the trial court denied Petitioner’s claim that the cumulative effect : of counsel’s errors deemed him ineffective?