1. Rulings Below: The District Court denied relief and the Court of Appeals affirmed. The federal
constitutional claim presented on grounds consistent with Petitioner 's actual innocence is:
Issue One: Whether Petitioner Is Entitled To An Acquittal Or New Trial On The Newly
Discovered Exonerating Evidence Showing Actual Innocence Based On Recantations Of Key
Material Witnesses ' Testimony In Light Of The Evidence Received At The Held July 27, 2018.
July 30, 2018 Through August 01. 2018 Evidentiary Hearing ?

2. Rulings Below: The District Court denied relief and the Court of Appeals affirmed. The federal
constitutional claim presented is:
Issue Two: Whether Petitioner Received Minn. Const. Art I, §6, §7, §10 And Sixth
Amendment Ineffective Assistance Of Trial Counsel Under State v. Nicks, 831 N.W.2d 493
(Minn. 2013) And Strickland v. Washington For Failure To (A) Interview And Investigate To
Discover The New Exonerating Evidence Showing Actual Innocence Based On Recantations Of
Key Material Witnesses ' Testimony In Ground One . (B) Advise Petitioner His Due Process
Right To Consular Assistances, (C) Object To Credibility Vouching By Ms. White, And (D)
Object To Inadmissible Interrogatory Recordings And Statements Obtained Without Consent,
Miranda And Tennessen Warnings?

3. Rulings Below: The District Court denied relief and the Court of Appeals affirmed. The federal
constitutional claim presented is:
Issue Three: Whether Petitioner Received Minn. Const. Art I, §6, §7, §10 And Sixth
Amendment Ineffective Assistance Of Appellate Counsel Under State v. Nicks, 831 N.W.2d 493
(Minn. 2013) And Strickland v. Washington For Failure To Effectively And Adequately Raise
Ineffective Assistance Of Trial Counsel Claim During Direct Appeal For Trial Attorney Failure
To (A) Interview And Investigate To Discover The New Exonerating Evidence Showing Actual
Innocence Based On Recantations Of Key Material Witnesses ' Testimony In Ground One , (B)
Advise Petitioner His Due Process Right To Consular Assistances, (C) Object To Credibility
Vouching By Ms. White, And (D) Object To Inadmissible Interrogatory Recordings And
Statements Obtained Without Consent, Miranda And Tennessen Warnings?

4. Rulings Below: The District Court denied relief and the Court of Appeals affirmed. The federal
constitutional claim presented on grounds consistent with Petitioner 's innocence is:
Issue Four: Whether The Government And Ms. White Violated Petitioner 's Clearly
Established Minn. Const. Art I, §6, §7, §10 And Constitutional Due Process Right Of The Fifth
And Fourteenth Amendment Under Brady v. Maryland And Its Progeny In Light Of The
Evidence Received At The Held July 27. 2018. July 30. 2018 Through August 01. 2018
Evidentiary

Whether Petitioner Is Entitled To An Acquittal Or New Trial On The Newly Discovered Exonerating Evidence Showing Actual Innocence Based On Recantations Of Key Material Witnesses' Testimony