Were the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments violated when a juror admitted viewing unadmitted evidence during deliberations and stated that her verdict was prejudiced thereby?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED I Were the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments violated when a juror admitted viewing unadmitted evidence during deliberations and stated that her verdict was prejudiced thereby? II Did the District Court err by denying petitioner's juror misconduct claim on the merits even though the state never refuted the presumption of prejudice and without an evidentiary hearing as requestéd by petitioner in both state and federal courts? III Were petitioner's Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights to effective assistance of trial counsel and due process violated where trial counsel failed to investigate and raise an alibi defense despite readily available strong evidence in the record? IV Were petitioner's rights to the effective assistance of appellate counsel and to due process under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments violated when appellate counsel refused to file a habeus corpus petition with the direct appeal and when appellate counsel stated that to do so would jeopardize the appeal as the petition was unsupported, where the District Court ultimately concluded the evidence did support petitioner's claims contained in his petition for writyof habeas corpus? Vv Did the District Court deny petitioner's Fourteenth Amendment right to due process when it imbued the petitioner, a layman with no prior legal training, background or exposure to the legal system, with legal insight of such sufficiency as to realize that his appellate counsel's instructions were erroneous and to disobey appellate counsel's orders not to file a habeas petition during the appeal. but to wait until post-appeal, with the result petitioner's grounds 2 through 6 were procedurally barred under 28 U.S.C. 2244(d)(1)(D) for lack of diligence because petitioner did not file a habeas petition in pro se during the appeal so as to create an exception to the procedural bar rule of Coleman v Thompson, 501 US 722 i991)? i . VI Were the petitioner's Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights to a fair trial and due process violated where the prosecution suppressed and withheld evidence of an irrefutable alibi defense which placed petitioner out of the area, state and country at the times the alleged crimes allegedly , occurred, and secondly suppressed and withheld strong impeachment evidence of the star witnesses’ plot to frame the petitioner? : ; ; VII . Was the petitioner's right to due process under the Fourteenth Amendment abrogated where both the Ninth Circuit and District Courts denied a Certificate of Appealability using the wrong legal standard or misapplying the correct ; one via narrow interpretation? VIII Where a state habeas petition is denied as untimely by the Federal District Court under 28 U.S.C. 2244(d)(2) although filed within the one-year AEDPA deadline, does the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause mandate that a habeas petitioner be accorded the right to challenge such a denial under the rule that the presumption of correctness may be rebutted by clear and convincing evidence? / / / . / / / / / / / ' . / / ii So nnn