Whether a United States Court of Appeal's has decided an important question of federal law that conflicts with relevant decisions of this Court

QUESTIONS PRESENTED ee. I. | WHETHER A UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEAL'S HAS DECIDED AN . IMPORTANT QUESTION OF FEDERAL’ UAW THAT CONFLICTS WITH a RELEVANT DECISIONS OF THIS COURT, WHERE THE TRIAL’ COURT MISCORED OV-6 AT FIFTY POINTS, WHERE THE RECORD FAILS TO . ; DISCLOSE ANY PREMEDITATED INTENT TO KILU? ; Ill. . WHETHER THE SIXTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEAL'S HAS DECIDED AN IMPORTANT FEDERAL’ QUESTION IN A WAY THAT CONFLICTS WITH . RELEVANT DECISIONS OF THIS COURT, AND SANCTIONED SUCH A a "DEPARTURE BY A LOWER COURT WHERE, THE TRIAL COURT FAILURE TO . ADDRESS THE QUESTION OF WHETHER THERE WAS A DENIAL OF RIGHT TO CHOICE OF COUNSEL’ AND THAT COUNSEL WAS INEFFECTIVE FOR FAILURE TO RECUSE HIMSELF AFTER KNOWLEDGE THAT COUNSEL’ HAD oe BEEN RETAINED FOR TRIAL’. U.S. CONST. AMS VI, XIV? a WHETHER THE SIXTH CIRCUIT DECISION IS OBJECTIVELY Co UNREASONABLE, CONFLICTS WITH STRICKLAND CAUSE AND PREJUDICE TWO-PART INQUIRY, WHERE APPELUATE COUNSEL’ FAILURE TO RAISE INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF TRIAL COUNSELS NONDISCLOSURE OF ; FAVORABLE PLEA OFFER WITHOUT THE DEFENDANT’S CONSENT . CONTRARY TO THE HOLDINGS IN L'APLER v. COOPER, 132 S.CT 1376 _ (2012) AND MISSOURT v. FRY, 132 S.CT 1399? ; . UIST OF PARTIES {X] All parties appear in the caption of the case on the cover page. { ] All parties do not appear in the caption of the case on the cover page. A list of all