Whether the federal district court violated the Due Process Clause by failing to allow the petitioner to fully litigate his claims

No question identified. : 16 Diol. Te Hemrable Federal Disthiot (pert violate Ce Pui br ties Lite process eT inbdld ir be &* AGE . Arudrat of the Unite Stats (gst tim as till as He (145 b& G¢y A 10%) Aromat Rights ot be US. (sti tlio, hn. Ge nell. Fada Distiiol Curb alloc fo lath | States of rneitee to use fhe perlttmer Lt Hylis Scat. 05 will be Stele widlte, jie Feliol Distrot (prt hin, ob whi. they ane ab Uely fo Lo eh eh 8 yee 4 i ste Cl als 3 fe WY, state Tanshyts fl fa’ Cod ont (prelate eft) aucardiig fy 28 USC 1138 in Fehoal Dtniv Z | See Marrese Vo teri tan fae of Ovtke pacdiv ems, 10 US. . 373, 580, 81 (. Fl. 2k 1/05 S. tt. var dee) 5 he Horpreble (Jedral Distriee Curt) hax. to Loluy. the L& bir ad Poh fee i Vide phiffoer yn. Myles pireet Oypenl. pie to . my. Myles on ‘915¢ 20/9 L sivth thet Court o€ Cyals fae Pits @ ohn Co banathe Cypilale (aut Jou Te (order/madate) te Fig: Ay dati ob ves jdiealr, Yederal Cats (must) ate. Hp Sane lorelugte ¢ ect) fp Stale. Col Sadgereais OS. AY (would recie. M Yo Cuts Ob the retin State.” | (Ea) a