Whether the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause was violated

QUESTIONS PRESENTED I. Whether the United States Court of Appeal's for the Third Circuit entered a decision in conflict with the decision of several other United States Court of Appeal's for the Third Circuit and the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania,on whether a statement provided by a :s::non-testifying co-defendant was harmless err and did not violate Mr. Alvarado's Sixth Amendment Right under the Confrontation Clause. Such a departure by a lower court calls for this Court's supervisory power. . . II. Was Mr. Alvarado's trial counsel ineffective for failing to safeguard Mr. Alvarado's Sixth Amendment right to Confront an adverse witness. III. Whether Martinez v. Ryan 566 U.S. 1(2012),excuse the procedural default on Mr. Alvarado's ineffective assistance of counsel claim where Mr. Alvarado's PCRA counsel declined to advance such a claim because PCRA counsel believed that Mr. Alvarado's Sixth amendment Confrontation Claim had no merit. Iv. Was there sufficient evidence of the crime of Robbery in order to support a conviction of second degree murder without a robbery victim or evidence of a robbery. | Question PLESENEED. oe cece cece nce ce cece n nec e eee