4VvC <2'V(^)r€. \V<> tf/jervfs 4o 4wnf>er
(Xf\d ui'iAWnold £vi<4e/\ce. AivoroWe. 4o 4Wfl. LJVie-VWr line stafe Coor-V^ erreA i^n^n.
Suppress
VV.4 '\V\c>n€5^ • fur\Vj^rmor€. ^ -VWe Co^r4s a\Wu)<i4 AAaejco
4* Knaujro^l^ \<e 4o 4W CgocV, c&rruni-V
(Xrd \AgWW- |o<lc\ ^ ^>V° cV^- 610(4 feAepaA * fi(()
of tobcf. Vs c learl^ 'SopporfeA by 4-W l rexo<x^ boV
inv/e^-fg^Aioo I'nVrx |jJlif>e>o44-Wic iII^ cl\ miSGoa^ucV.
g, U)be\W 4W SV^Ve Cooc^s erred loWo 4-W^
a\Uu)G.4 4r n«1 G&orrsel 4^ Veil 4-W
4Wb be believed 4be dm las* allegations
i I (l ^
O-gaiosf n \ do ear <any C&n^u&nce e^'

Whether the state courts erred when they allowed the state and its agents to tamper with, suppress, and withhold evidence favorable to the petitioner, and further allowed them to falsely accuse the petitioner of perjury and violate local, state, and federal rules, without any consequence for their illegal misconduct