Question not identified

QUESTIONS PRESENTED : QUESTION I: Isn’t it true, that, under the “recusal standard” addressed in 28 U.S.C.S. §455(a); “what matters is not the reality of bias or prejudice but its appearance, and quite simply and quite universally, recusal is required whenever impartiality might reasonably be questioned. Justice must satisfy the appearance of justice. The very purpose of §455(a) is to promote confidence in ~ the judiciary by avoiding even the appearance of impropriety whenever possible.” QUESTION II: Was it a violation of Brady and of “Due Process” for the state to withhold ; evidence from the defense that clearly preserved a second instance of previous testimony, by the alleged victim, given under oath, that was in complete contradiction to her present testimony given during the defendant’s criminal proceedings? QUESTION III: Was the defendant denied effective assistance of Counsel, by Counsel’s incompetence and multiple failures to represent the defendant through; failure to perform any a ~ type of investigation, failure to issue subpoenas to known witnesses and transcripts, failure to : preserve issues through objection and failure to actively participate in the questioning of the state witness /alleged victim to determine competency. QUESTION IV: Is it proper for an Attorney, to attempt to serve as a criminal trial lawyer, which is a manner inconsistent with Counsel’s actual skills, abilities, knowledge and experience or was there a duty of self-recusal by the counselor to conduct himself in a manner consistent with ethical, professional criteria? ii