WHETHER THE LOWER COURT'S DECISION WAS CONTARY TO CLEARLY ESTABLISHED UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT PRECEDENT? CARPENTER v. UNITED STATES, 138 S. Ct. 2206 (2018) 2018 US LEXIS 3844; 201 L. Ed.2d 507.

SHOULD CARPENTER v. U.S, 138 S. Ct. 2206 (2018) BE GIVEN FULL RETROACTIVITY STATUS OF LAW IN MICHIGAN PURSUANT TO MCR b.502 (G)(2)?

WAS MR. BUTLER DENIED DUE PROCESS AND A FAIR TRIAL BY THE INTRODUCTION AT TRIAL OF UNAUTHENICATHTfjj HISTORICAL CELL SITE LOCATION INFORMATION (CSLI) OBTAINED WITHOUT A VALID PROBABLE CAUSE WARRANT TO AT&T IN VIOLATION OF THE FOURTH AMENDMENT; ALTERNATIVELY, TRIAL AND APPELLATE COUNSEL WERE INEFFECTIVE FOR FAILING TO OBJECT AND INVESTIGATE THE UNAUTHENTICATED (CSLI) DOCUMENTS, DENYING MR. BUTLER HIS STATE AND FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS UNDER U.S. CONST. IV, VI, XIV; CONST. 1963, Art 1 §§ 11, 15, 17, 20.

Whether the lower court's decision was contrary to clearly established United States Supreme Court precedent?