Whether the nonretroactive application of the constitutional rule of Ramos v. Louisiana, in this case being substantive and/or discretionary for the state, is a discriminatory act prohibited by the constitutional clause of the same Protection of Law

QUESTION PRESENTED January 12, 2021. Declaring there has been no such motion in retrial request for the : nullity of the sentence and guilty verdict through most open votes, violation of the sixth amendment to a fair and impartial trial, the precept of reasonable doubt and in crass violation of due process of Law. The nonretroactive application of the constitutional rule of Ramos v. Louisiana, in this case being this substantive and/or discretionary for state, is a : discriminatory act prohibited by the constitutional clause of the same Protection of Law. : 2.Conviction supported by perjured testimony. The main Prosecution witness, Loraine Rivera Vazquez, provided two diametrically opposed affidavits. In the first sworn statement of Loraine Rivera Vazquez, she accuses Felipe Fontanes Burgos as the author of the events. That first affidavit was corroborated with the rest of the evidence. Said first sworn statemen was admitted in the proceedings against Camilo José Arango Latorre, here the petitioner. So the jury did not have the opportunity to examine it in depth.