Can convictions of aggravated-sexual-battery be sustained when the state-failed-to-prove-elements

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. CAN CONVICTIONS OF AGGRAVATED SEXUAL BATTERY BE SUSTAINED WHEN THE STATE OF TENNESSEE FAILED TO PROVE THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF THE CRIME AS DESCRIBED BY THE CHARING INSTRUMENT (GRAND JURY INDICTMENT) 2. CAN CONVICTIONS OF AGGRAVATED SEXUAL BATTERY BE SUSTAINED WHEN THE STATE OF TENNESSEE USED EVIDENCE THAT IS AT “VARIANCE” WITH THE THE CHARING INSTRUMENT (GRAND JURY INDICTMENT) 3. CAN ACLAIM OF INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF TRIAL COUNSEL BE RECOGNIZED FOR TRIAL COUNSELS FAILURE TO OBJECT TO THE TRIAL COURTS USE OF A JURY SELECTION PROCESS THAT DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE MANDATORY REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED BY THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE UNDER THE CONTROLLING PROVISIONS OF TENN. R. CRIM. P. RULE 24 4. IS APPELLATE COUNSEL INEFFECTIVE FOR FAILING TO ALLOW PETITIONER TO HAVE INPUT ON ISSUES PRESENTED FOR DIRECT APPEAL REVIEW 5. IS THE TENNESSEE CRIMINAL COURT OF APPEALS IN ERROR BY USING A STANDARD OF APPELLATE REVIEW THAT WAS NOT IN AFFECT AT THE TIME THE ALLEGED CRIMES PETITIONER WAS CONVICTED ALLEGEDLY OCCURRED IN VIOLATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL FIFTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS AND EX POST FACTO PROTECTIONS ii