whether-the-facts-supporting-the-first-and-fourth-grounds-became-or-could-have-become-known-prior-to-the-date-on-which-the-conviction-became-final

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1) The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 —_(AEDPA) establishes a one-year statute of limitations for state “inmates seeking federal habeas corpus relief. Langrum II was time barred for a portion of the appeal to the lower courts under the notion that "the facts supporting the first and fourth grounds , became or could have become known prior to the date an which his conviction became final." Would it be discoverable for a : defendant, prior to trial, to know of the private investigator and/or DNA expert hired to assist him or her in preparation for trial? : 2) Strickland does not require any appealate court to defer to decisions that are uninformed by an adequate investigation into the controlling facts and law. Langrum II's Writ of Habeas Corpus rulings are marred with decisions that are uninformed by an adequate investigation into the facts. In the interest of justice and fairness to the American public, at what stage does the actual pre-trial investigation become a portion of the record? , 3) Whether ther is evidence in the record to support the | indictment and conviction? Does the "presumtion of prejudice" recognized in Roe v. Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S. 470(20), apply where a trial judge informs a criminal defendant's caunsel to file for an appeal? . . i