1) Is the complete failure to investigate potentially corroborating witness (the victim Roberto Guillen) be considered and accepted tactical decision,and actions (above) does not violate the petitioner 's U.S-. constitutional rights Amendments 5,6, and 14?as a not ineffective assistance of counsel and

2) Was the defendant 'splea unknowing,unintelligent,and 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 testitestified that the incident was an accident?an accident,and ■ was

3) Was it ineffective assistance of counsel when counsel failed to investigate witnesses (which includes the victim Roberto Guillen) before sentencing?

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.

Question not identified