Whether the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals abused its discretion and erred in denying Petitioner's State Application For Writ Of Habeas Corpus on the merits without the appellate court first considering the findings of the trial court

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED CA) Whether Ye ~rexas Courk O€ Criminal Agpeals as we ulkimate LackGnder in7Texas habeas corpus proceedings abused ths Msccalon and erred waar tk dened Pebhonans Stake Agplicahon For Cork Of Webeas Corpus on the meriks . without Mie ogeellake Cour frsk conarding the Couse xo he kW\al courk he original Loakinder ia Texas lnaloeas Corpus pecceedings.-To altid She “Trial Wudge +0 Moke written Gadings o€ Lack ord conclusions o€ lad. So Vne ageedlag Counk woulk lave a Lockual loasis fo base VAS Kekerminalion on. IA vidlabion of Hhe U-S.IU YK amensmenk. (2) Whekher Yhe “Texas Comk ©€ Covntnal Aggeals cloused Ks Usceeton wher ik failed +o afford eekkmnen a hearing as Proaulgated oy Xhis Coury 1 “Tounsend v Sain 392 us. 29% Clava). When th was uardiseuted that gebtione had allesed Lacks, & keue would able him Yo relie€ . Before denying Pebinoners ole Agglicakun For vorck Of Makers Corpus on the Meciks. Kn Violation of Yhe US 11M Anedmerk , (9) vabether the “yexas Comk O€ Ceimnal Agyeals decision Genying Pebhione's Brady Claim was dyectwuely unreasoalle ow light of Me materiality of Me '@ulchar Ka, Which was we Ensheumertalily OL Lebkroners Sseycdelerse Mheony ~ Pursuant to Beaby vy Maryland 393 US. 23 C19@3)+ Kyles v wshilley Ws SCE ASSS C1445) Rekthion Ear work of Canopot\ page|