Whether the petitioner was denied his right to counsel

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Issue 1: Whether the appellate court erred in concluding that petitioner was not denied his right to counsel when the state court accepted petitioner’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea without first appointing him new conflict free counsel or providing him an opportunity to confer with conflict free counsel. Issue 2: Whether the appellate court erred in concluding that petitioner’s appellate counsel was not ineffective for failing to argue that he had been denied his right to conflict free counsel before withdrawing his guilty plea Issue 3: Whether the appellate court erred in concluding petitioner’s appellate counsel was not ineffective for failing to raise a claim that petitioner did not knowingly and voluntarily waive his right to conflict free counsel in violation of Faretta v. California. 3 PrefixIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OCTOBER TERM, 2021 ANTON TUOMI, PETITIONER, vs. SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT. PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT The Petitioner, ANTON TUOMI, respectfully prays that a writ of certiorari issue to review the judgment-order of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit entered on November 13, 2020 Case No. 17-14373-EE; Southern District of Florida Case Number 16-cv-80542-RLR.