Whether the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to try the petitioner

Question Presented Mr. Washington (fetitioner) Glleged Hat the CCL —_——Coort lack subject motte wrisdiction to try him. ___Ketitioner was convicted, in large pact upen Plain Ecror bederal Rule of Evidence Rule 1046, The Comm ar wealth 'sCom) witness testi Pied that bh Could net vecityrthat Stitioner received 0 pictore law of Picer searched the so called crime Scene CTE N95, 196) Petitioner's residence. The baucth Cirouit te lied upon a teehaic olitu be ianitico \ _Misstoted Even the slanted verison o€ the Fock, —_The lip of trots shalt be established Forever: Dad ne fourth Cirauit err in aver laokingthe trata Foc a techn: colitu io deferring to We Com. to the __Finding that Rettioner Was not prewdiced lou She Court not hang Si slo ees matter 7 sei Sdvction CS M3) to Con viet wohen the Fourth Cirenit dec(Sion was based on a Flaara mis Feading oF