I. Did the California Courts' Unreasonable Refusal to
Hold an Evidentiary Hearing Entitle Dalton to anEvidentiary Hearing?

II. Did Trial Counsel Render Ineffective Assistance by
Failing to Investigate and to Present a Taint andMemory Expert?

III. Did Trial Counsel Render Ineffective Assistance by
Permitting the Prosecutor to Elicit Hearsay FromTiffany's Fresh Complaint Witness?

IV. Did the Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation
Syndrome (CSAAS) Evidence Deprive Dalton of DueProcess and a Fair Trial; Did Trial Counsel RenderIneffective Assistance?

V. Did the Individual and Cumulative Effect of the
Errors Render Dalton's Trial Fundamentally Unfair?

VI. Did the Trial Court Violate Dalton's Constitutional
Rights by Proceeding on the Amended Informationin Dalton's Absence?

VII. Was Dalton Denied his Federal Due Process Right to
a Fundamentally Fair Trial by Trying him Absentia?

VIII. Did the Uncharged Tiffany Evidence Deprive Dalton
of Due Process and a Fair Trial?

IX. Did the Court Reporter's Failure to Preserve the Voir
Dire and Opening Statements Deny Dalton hisFederal Due Process Right to a Complete andAccurate Appellate Record?

Did the California Courts' Unreasonable Refusal to Hold an Evidentiary Hearing Entitle Dalton to an Evidentiary Hearing?