Is a petitioner denied due process when the courts fail to review all relevant evidence in the overall, newly supplemented record for an actual innocence gateway claim as envisioned in House v. Bell, and he is denied the provision of additional evidence in support of such claim?

QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW: IS A PETITIONER DENIED DUE PROCESS WHEN THE COURTS FAIL TO REVIEW ALL RELEVANT EVIDENCE IN THE OVERALL, NEWLY SUPPLEMENTED RECORD FOR AN ACTUAL INNOCENCE GATEWAY CLAIM AS ENVISIONED IN House v. Bell, 547 U.S. 518 (2006), AND HE IS DENIED THE PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF SUCH CLAIM? SECOND QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW: IS A PETITIONER DENIED DUE PROCESS WHEN HIS STATE CONVICTION IS BASED ON EX POST FACTO LAW, MISAPPLICATION OF A JUDICIAL CONSTRUCT, SELECTIVE REVIEW OF THE EVIDENCE AND IMPROPER JURY INSTRUCTIONS WHICH ARE HELD TO BE CONSTITUTIONALLY SUFFICIENT TO MAINTAIN HIS CONVICTIONS FOR VIOLENT FELONIES IN THE ABSENCE OF SCIENTER, PHYSICAL FORCE OR THREAT THEREOF? THIRD QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW: IS A PETITIONER’S RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS DENIED WHEN FEDERAL COURTS AGREE WITH THE IMPOSITION OF PROCEDURAL BARS FROM A STATE COURT WHEN THOSE BARS ARE IMPROPERLY IMPOSED AS THEY DID NOT COMPORT WITH THE RULE(S), THE STATUTE(S), OR CASELAW AND WERE IN CONFLICT WITH THE PRIMACY OF THE OHIO SUPREME COURT? FOURTH QUESTION FOR REVIEW: ARE A PETITIONER'S 4TH AMENDMENT, EQUAL PROTECTION AND ARTICLE IV RIGHTS VIOLATED WHEN A STATE OFFICER IN A STATE CASE PERFORMS A WIRETAP ON TWO INDIVIDUALS OUTSIDE OF STATE JURISDICTION AND IN VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OF THE STATES WHERE THE PARTIES BEING TAPPED ARE LOCATED?