Question not identified

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED oe 1) Is the complete failure to investigate potentially corroborating witness (the victim Roberto Guillen) be considered and accepted as a tactical decision,and not ineffective assistance of counsel and actions (above) does not violate the petitioner's U.S. constitutional rights Amendments 5,6,and 14? ; 2) Was the defendant's plea involuntary, after.considering that the attorney failed to investigate any of the witnesses which inclueded alibi witness (the victim Roberto Guillen), who signed an affidavit stating,the incident was an accident,and testitestified that the incident was an accident? 3) Was it ineffective assistance of counsel when counsel failed to ; investigate witnesses (which includes the victim Roberto Guillen) before sentencing? 7 4) Did the United States court of appeals decide an important question of federal law in error and in a way that conflicts with relevent decisions of this court when deciding not to apply and overlook the ‘Schlup actual innocence inquiry,and constitutional error in this case. i¢ .