Whether a clearly erroneous legal conclusion by a state court may be afforded a presumption of correctness and relied upon to deny habeas corpus relief

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW . I.WHETHER A CLEARLY ERRONEOUS LEGAL CONCLUSION EY A STATE COURT MAY BE AFFORDED A PRESUMPTION OF CORRECTNESS AND RELIED UPON TO DENY HABEAS CORPUS RELIEF WHERE THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF THE CHARGED OFFENSE THAT THE RAILROAD GUARD VICTIM WAS A “LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER” IS ACTIVELY CONTRADICTED BY . CRIMINAL STATUTES? . . , II.WHETHER A CLAIM THAT ESTABLISHES THE WITHHOLDING , : . OF EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE BY THE PROSECUTION THAT IS NOT DISCOVERED UNTIL AFTER TRIAL MAY BE : SUBJECTED TO PROCEDURAL DEFAULT ON THE BASIS THAT THE PROSECUTOR FALSELY REPRESENTED AT TRIAL THAT ; THE EVIDENCE WAS PESTROYED? _TII.WHETHER A LOCAL -APPELLATE RULE REQUIRING A PRAECIPE TO TRANSMIT THE RECORD PERMITS, BUT DOES : NOT. REQUIRE, DISMISSAL OF THE APPEAL FOR LACK OF : THE INCLUSION THEREOF, IS “FIRMLY ESTABLISHED AND REGULARLY FOULLOVED" SO AS TO CONSTITUTE AX APEQUATE AND INDEPENDENT PROCEDURAL BAR TO HABEAS REVIEW OF AN ILLEGALLY ENHANCED SENTENCE IN. . VIOLATION OF APPRENDI, BLAKELY AND ALLEYNE, WHERE ' THE APPEAL IS SUBSEQUENT TO THE INITIAL DIRECT : APPEAL AND THE APPELLATE COURT ALREADY HAS THE ; RECORD BEFORE IT, AND THE APPELLANT MAKES A ; DILIGENT BFPORT TO CORRECT THE DEFICIENCY? : -i ;