Was the Petitioner denied the right to a fair trial, due to hypothetical-jury, jury-instruction, ineffective-assistance-of-counsel, reasonable-doubt

No question identified. : 1. Was the Petitioner denied the right to a fair trial, due to hypothetical jury , _ instruction, and suffered ineffective assistance of counsel, regarding reasonable , . doubt. Where the United States Court of Appeals entered a decision whiéh conflicts with the decision of the United States District Courts. And has decided _” an important Federal question in a way that conflicts with another Federal District : Courts decision. Which is cause for an exercise of this Courts supervisory power? oo. 2. Does the application of Newly Discovered facts apply, here, where the a Petitioner raised the claim within less thati(60) days under the required PCRA . Statute after the Petitioner became aware. Where the question is of Constitutional importance, and the language of the lower Courts require this Court to exercise it's _ + supervisory power. And finally, would there be a disparity‘without this Court . ‘+. addressing this important question oflaw? ae 0 ce _ 3, Was Petitioner diligent in seeking relief once he became aware, that the jury instructions on. weasonable doubt as given by Rénee Cardwell Hughes were : fatally flawed? And violated his Constitutional right to fair trial? 4. — Was it Petitioners only opportunity to a de novo review from the District = Court and the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, related to ineffective assistance of -__ counsel where Petitioner raised ineffective assistance of trial and PCRA counsel, . + under Martin v. Ryan, and where it was Petitioners first/only opportunity to seek + telief from the Federal Court related to the flawed jury instructions on reasonable doubt? a