Whether petitioner is entitled to a copy of the state habeas evidentiary hearing record under the Due Process Clause

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED AY In atederal \abecs Fi led bY a Stale. Wnwndte Pv rsvank to 2B USC. rN 22Suy wWhredvec Pei ky OWN is entitled Soca Gpy of Wiis State Habeas evidenbarY heaving, as idence, Undex \veDue | Process Clavse Lhe Gnstiublon a determined bY this Gerb in Lona v.Districl & Lowa, 335 0.3.172, BTS. Cb.362, ITL, £d.28 29 (1966) and lor other Congkintiona RQrs ab delsrwed oy thie Goor. . (2) Where Pe tikvarer Subswirthed Some a nis Cleins for ; Relief on PI AW POPS in is 2254 Hebeq o Pet: bicn, aL the initial Pleadings Rebitiongt 1S enrtidiedte Amend, nis RE Lion on Forms that Should be Roovided Le \aim, Porsuanl LlUscsg 2254 R.4) and The libvally Gnsk Wing of a Pro Se wae Vebibion onder Lanes v Kerner, Loy U.S. 5/9, 30L. Ed,.2b6 52,92 S. CL. 594 C1772), and lor ether Cnr Wicna Rais a5 Deeersinel by Govt. (3) Wheye He District Cove Debaewned Del Some of Pekbioner Claims pot Exhaustech, Rribine is Entited te fer Notice and Permit \wortte bddvess the Rocecdeara| . Deflled loins / issue Prict Lo Kein Dismissal, Under Day 4 McDononan, 5 47 U.S. 178, (26 S. CLOTS, [69L. Ed 24316 (2006), andlor Othey Leac\ Lidietiies and . QUESTION(S) PRESENTED . The Due Recess as Ddlexmived oy this Cort. (| Uhexe. Veribierex Wate Exhausted Same & is Claing On Divect Notea\ Wr Stale Courle as DefexwinedsY this | Court mBxournv. Nem, 344 U.S.443, 73 S.CE. AT ATL. Ed 67 (753), The Dictsicl Goel Ewed WwFaluebe. Addxess the Claims as Unatnosted. 7 (5S) Whabex Rbibionex Recieved Ine PRective Assistance of Tria [Attorney for Failure to File Motion To SuPpess RebiLionar's Inceeniedding, Stakemens Dorin Nintertoaat — fon In Nis Realdance Ww Viclation to His M wranda Rigs As Detoswtnedloy Ts Gort in Mivanda v. Avizona, 33Y U.S, 43b6, 86 S.CE.1602,1b L, Ed. 2d 694 (1966), Where Con sidering the Lotality of the Grevmstance, Reb bioner Wosiin Gitted ¥ |The Districl Gorl Erved nm Nt & valuatina A\\ Ae Greomstanes, Ao Dad Ne Sule Gal. | (6) Whether Petibaner Recieved Ineffective Agsistance oF Tria | Atkorney For Failuwe te File Molion Suppress . Petitioner's [ncrimiprtna Statemartg Dering blerrouettion, a5 InvolurtaY dstainl wd hoeye Gens dating the bial y of The Grooinstarnce Jace dina wrort Ritioner Did Zeb — Undeestand. The Lp darrekex and jhe Detective tae fainting QUEST Ios) PRESENTED , Court Failed to Considerthe Voraity of The Circoma tenes. (7) Whether Rtilrener Recieved Ineffective Aesistance Of Tria/A Etorney Foe Foileve be detain, Asap) Aveloic Tnberprelasr | Boring Pebitioner’s Jury Teal WherePetittoner did Mot : Understand The Egystion-Ardoic \nlerorekabion, Lr Pav, The Difinitions of Troan Toren, Waa Cetikioner Made his Attorney AWARE oF, Alnd Therefore Could not Pali cipaled Pera Wins Coon Defoe, asDetorio\ nec. | byY ts Gorln Indiana v. Edww0td3,55Y US.16Y, 128 S. CL.2379, I L. Ed. 2d 345 (2eeo) | (8) Whee We Shite Gorks Finding Of facts wh Wabats Covpus Hexviny is Nob Erpoied oy Evidence ov Testiunaney, . OL Ved Fi nper L, Tnadmissilrle \\ear sal, Ret iLioner js Entibledd. Foe RAG Dorsant Le 2B US.C8 2254 (d} ( ay , As Nat Entitled. Lo Resowption of Cypectness. (7) where theDibaict Court Committed Multiple Judicial estar iinet, Wrongfeel/ Stale The Existawe F Toansctighs — Faileree Recootiee Fack In Farsur & tebdiemer And. ailuve te Reconas Reitiones Lege] Authorities and, Facls SOP Pat . led bythe Records, Retin ls Entitled that Mis , CR Re-assigned to Diffeent Disbich Sudye on Remar — Rossuonll te 28 U.3.C3. & 2lob or other Aufhevities —