Whether the petitioner's aggravated sentences were in violation of due process and conflict with the United States Supreme Court holdings in Apprendi v. New Jersey and Blakely v. Washington

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW __Wars the pebbioners agaravated sentences was 1a | to lohion of due process and conflicks withthe _Unuted Shales Supreme Court holdings in Apprends | _v. New Jecsey and Blakely v, Washingten when the —_by_ponderance of evidence —_— Jere violated when the Court imposed Consecutive -_Senkraces for bidoapping and attempted fst —_dsaqree murden Did the cours commit veversible error by denying — _pstthooner's foreile nights to self representation __ |_.__.__-when ib vuled Woot the pelibiongs cannot represent —_hum self no longec in Chambers without giving — the pethoner notice | pe i ; | po Pahies To The Proceedings pe Mein Dunloar*325047 Pelibioner PAD BF 2480 LOUNES W LA I Tucson, Anone 85734 0 -_Altorney foc Respondent po ted Stobes -—___.__ Aezong, Ab toiney Geneon) pol ctor Genera) _ De pactment of Sushice