Did the trial court err in reviewing prisoner Williams' initial motion for post-conviction relief for violations of the 6th Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED | Did The trial court err when vb Yeviewed brisoner Williams initial tnat in at post conviction velit for verladtim Traneckigt on o Condti tional \ibation of the Go Arnendment Re itemetfinding dyounts To the ihettedlivye dssictahce of counsel vin of deting aie gh cauiselorden cours bee di M.A.Rlination Aptepre e relic the Aile of North Catolinds Mtide81 Min peta che he dein Fe vii dh au ile ‘ an “neti ve Ve elforcihd “The Sdine order which Veduiived Abbatiled counsel To betlec the he meet adil the trial coutt ax when —tdusing evidet ty heating cot bth ett, y ral heating Prisoner Williams actual intnocetnce clan in bis owh \aidtten Me ion Ny Rho oulastatt idl Grady violations, when the dle & Newth Carolina has it's own velief avdildbk for a Rovidvo vielition under Stale v.McEdcrery, (4 NC. Apa LHISE ad 574( (994): dismissal©(See dlgo Roviato v, United Stales, 330853 179.¢4.lod3 | | Fd, dd 6391957) 3 Did the Didtict Coutt ett whete, Feiconer Wilts post conyidtioh vel imdtion chuwed Trial court had odeked —and dismissed cbboineht d counsel four diffetet tines with fow Aft df othe’, ito Wee all in vieldtch of the Trid court order to petect the MAR. forcing Frisoner Williams f handwtite his own tration 4 showing that QUESTION(S) PRESENTED Frioner \Ni\vans did, intact tecieve ine tect ive dssisldnice a ale counsel the carci mobi: doctrine dtfached dred dy within NC's Aitide 81 Motione4 NCGSS (5A-U4I fist hap the weit corm Habis dediine a pralect ioh dnd the Diceict Court did wat isle The deatly edablihed Federal Pravisioh df Const iTutiohdl Law? Dd The Litcuit Court ert when it did tet dddiess Prisoner Williams aver showing tet tetatdatin —with the evidences coming from Trial court files tid court prosec fr fs clagis ahd court evdludtansite Ta couns not ape counsel advected 4 Prisoner Wildes ta af alin vilton of ficktnan v Bel (3 F; 34 150,510 Ci fl head ey ddvocdle his cleats cause had the fect dor 4 déense coutsel, but with d Second prosecaot) Did the Dish Court by tet nding Tatu findings on iste Willie clear and ether ching At dcludl ‘infcence, withinhis handwritten Artide 31 Mati —tniclead The Citcuit Court who did tt Veview Williams dbped under the ole fw sf dnd, Taking 4 fresh laak without cobs the district's decision -ofpe b Where theD idk Court-and the Circuit Court-did nat a fol unkir 88 274(Jf)) hasbrisonerilhams ow heeh prejudiced ( , [ ] All parties appear in the caption of the case on the cover page. . , oa etn dn pon in the court whose judgment isthe subject ofthis STATE OF NOAH CAROLINA y, MICHAEL WILLIAMS STATE OF NORTHCAROLINA v. MIKE WILLTAMS STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v, MICHAEL. MUSTFUS WELLTAMS «Tale v, Mike Willams, No, 00-Ck5 000221, Sectland Coutl Speier Court fox The Stale & Nott h Cardin Sada eflered May 3 R001. tite \, Mi ke Willams No.00-SRS-000A8 Sect ltd Cou iti Cutt for the Stale of Noth Catalina J ode cited Ny 8 AOU, lak V, Michel Wathams 00-CRS-DO0RA?, Seat land Coutt Su etior Couttfr the Stile of Noith Catclind Jule eer N20 Same 4 File No's above AME NDE D Sedan Coutly Dupe Cutt . toe the Sale at North Card Jeet ettered Sefer a0 a00| «Sale v. Miche Wellans, No,00-CR5-2al-aa7 Scatland Coun Supetin Court ty the Stile é North Caroling Order ebteved My] a00l, “Sale v. Miche Matus lillams No.O0-CRS-2al-2.a7 Seat land Coun Sabet Court or the Site Nath Cataina.f led Addin etleted Nay Jt00 Tae v. Mid Hans Ho.00-CRS 2a, 00CRS 28a-O0CRS.AA9 ORCRS BALE, Sedtand Cay Sit Coat far the Shale a \bith Carling, Assn d Course etlered Februty 5 doid, {SAME Nt iano Withdraw As Counsel atered Febru y Old, «{GAME]:Order Allowing Withdeanal OF Counsd(and appating a offer ae st e200, _ ui f " «Fae vehi Medusa, No 0OCHS dal-aar7 Seat{and Coal Attothe And Production OF Tra Trt (and ahah a Ife ew) sited December [aol wll v. Micha Wika, No.00CRS 23.2.Seathand Url Saari Court fu the Stale d Nest h Carolina acted Jedaneat Mh B ddl , evileted March a0 203, ‘ EAE) fly Jugs Figs Of Mitigating Factors eitered M