Whether two-way video testimony violates a criminal defendant's confrontation and right to present a complete defense under Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED , . WHETHER TWO-WAY VIDEO TESTIMONY VIOLATES A CRIMINAL DEFENDANT'S CONFRONTATION AND RIGHT TO PRESENT A COMPLETE DEFENSE . * UNDER SIXTH AMENDMENT TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION? ; . In this case, it is undisputed fact. that the witness who was , .testifying against the petitioner via SKYPE was taken to a police station not to a U.S. Courthouse surrounded by a team of district _attorney and detectives, the lead case detective was whispering into his ear coaching him how to answer questions and make false . accusation against the petitioner that were not corroborated by , independent proof. However, despite this acknowledgment, the New : York Courts are of the opinion that since the U.S. Surpreme Court does not provide a mechanism for relief in post conviction proceedings, any misconduct occurred in any post conviction proceedings are not constitutional violation. . . The petitioner respectfully disagrees and maintains -that : there is a distinction between constitution not providing relief in a post conviction motion, which must be rooted in issues raised, and the fact that detective completely violated the legal process in the | ) no open court by. whispering answers into the witness ear during an . evidentiary hearing relevant to the post conviction motion which the Court deemed worthy of a hearing in the first place. But witness’ false, scripted and unsupported by evidence testimony that was influenced by lead detective whispering and pressuring him to make Statements favorable to the prosecution resulted in the denial of said motion. This, the petitioner submits was a constitutional . violation worthy of the Court's review. . . CONCLUSION . Here, the petitioner is not asking the Court to change its holding handed down in Lackawanna City. Dist. Att'y V. Coss, 532 . U.S. 394, 402, that did not provide a mechanism for criminal , defendants to have a constitutional right to post conviction remedies. But rather, once the state provides a hearing in a post conviction motion, the constitution should protect the required legal proceedings inside the Court room as it does in criminal trials. More specifically, protecting the witness against being _ coaches and answers whispered into his ear to defeat petitioner's motion. . Without: an .intervention from this Court, the police and ; prosecutors across the country will take advantage of the two-way ; witness testimonies conducted via SKYPE by (1) taking a testifying witness toa police station susceptible to intimidation and coercion; (2) will literally whisper into the ear of a witness, as it happened in this case, and obtain an unfair advantage over a m criminal defendant who has obtained new evidence to prove his/innocence in Court. For this reason, this Court should grant the , instant write and clarify this very important issue. : _ —_ eee