I. THE STATUTORY TIME LIMITS IMPOSED BY THE INTERSTATE AGREEMENT ON DETAINERS ARE STRICTLY JURISDICTIONAL AS APPLIED TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF A COMPACT, AND CANNOT BE WAIVED OR PROCEEDED UPON AFTER A TIME LIMIT VIOLATION(S); FURTHER, THE FUNDAMENTAL DEFECT EXCEPTION SHOULD BE APPLIED IN CARROLL'S IAD CLAIMS?

CARROLL'S CLAIM REGARDING AN UNSWORN JURY IS A QUESTION OF LAW OF WHETHER DUE PROCESS REQUIRES THAT A JURY BE SWORN UNDER THE SIXTH AMENDMENT'S GUARANTEE TO AN IMPARTIAL JURY?

CARROLL'S DEFECTIVE JURY VERDICT FORM SHOULD BE REVIEWED UNDER THE BRECHT STANDARD FOR SUBSTANTIAL AND INJURIOUS EFFECT AND UNDER THE INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF APPELLATE COUNSEL CLAIM?

Whether the statutory time limits imposed by the Interstate Agreement on Detainers are strictly jurisdictional and cannot be waived or proceeded upon after a time limit violation, and whether the fundamental defect exception should be applied