Whether the defendant's Sixth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment due process rights were violated when his attorney was 'not functioning as counsel' during the entire proceeding, lied to the defendant and the court about an independent DNA expert, and the prosecution suppressed and failed to turn over material DNA evidence

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED ‘Than attorney represent) AG a defendant ina Criminal case wag “not Functioning ag counsel” during the entire pro ceed) ng of two years that he or be ulag “ lying to the defendant and. The Court concerning an independent DNA expert “that did get exyet” and the progecuction per mq privy by “C4pprees ing and net turning over to | T the detente the nate erial DNA evidence.-ty be tested, is this a Vielaction. of the defendards C i the amend menk and f. courte erdth_ amend mert due. process Clause rights and Violation of ha , Cupere Court law set forthin Strickland, | V Washington, ob U2 6681984) and Brady v, Maryland, B18 U8. 33C113), despite the defend: plead na qu Hy and later? claim actual MINOT Le In ten years pe collateral proceeding? ( Which haz produced. to date no evidentiary heari "3. with +hematter3 AePPeat (LA outside oO te Common, law Meco rdy