Whether the petitioner's Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment constitutional rights were violated when he was tried in absentia without being informed of the constitutional claims he would be facing

Questions Presented | tees it violate o deSendands Sth, sixth and or fourteenth amendment aad fovrleanth amendment constrhchenal mghts be be presect oct tial uhea __ he. is act infocmed of. the constrdutional cals he will be reat bias whe does fight tea fundamenhsthy fair teral by having his trial _ia_absentia hea Hes the Varted states Supcema Goucts ruling in Crosby aad Fed. & Colm, P43 cleacly established ederal lau Sor the pucpose ofa Wat o£ Habeas Cocpus (22s) Po | a ne enn nn ene annette arate arsine | Fee eee eee | ae ee Se ae | oo TABLE OF CONTE foc Reviews te Tableof Autherty oo Opinions Below 0 a —Soashtubional and shebiney Provisisas Tavelbed 2g __Stolemend of the Case. se a a _Histery of Case Reason for Granting The. Pecbithoa —_Memoconduas_of Poiats ond Authonty oo A Ca _Relie£ Requested oc Cech Licata of Compliance _CartiSicate of Sornee 1» y ioe Pe ee a “ F -i2 NDE To APPENDICES 0