Jury-Misconduct

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED ; s Jury Misconduct . In applynpDb use § 2254 (ad) (2), both the stale courts” and Federal Courts’ decisions rere based on an unrersonable adelermination of the facts thet Jurtrs proudyed the petitioner and the case presented in the state Coutt Proceeding. Thus. j§ volated petiigers right of US. Lonstjtub ion of b44 Amendment, Il. osecution Misconduct and Corruption Ly “P/ yng 28 use § 225¢ (d)(2), both state carts” and Federal Courts’ judgements were based on an unreasonible determination of the facts thal prosecution purposely, professionaly and deliberately steped muller [ike Crime. scene and fabricated petitioners Mented Health test resedé (MMPE2) presented jn the state court proceecting Thus, (6 violeded pelitioners Hypht of us constitution of Sth and 44h Amendment. It /'s a “ypleal prosecution fabrication and corruption pase nationwide. This Cowt has the fil say Lo stop and correct f(t naklog wide. HL. Ineffective Assistance of Defense Counsel Tn applying 28 Usc $225$ LAN 2), bow stable courts’ and Federek curt’ decisions were based on at unreasondble défermination of the facts thal defense counsel fuled & prepare the case befrre the trl antl Kallad Bm Strike and rebut the prosecution's febriation aad corruption, and fulled bo | effectively defense the petitioner presented jy the state Court preveding. Thus, it violated petitieners right of US, constitution of bth Amendment, X., Cumulative Prejullice ) All above three claims are withn US, constitutton dimension. The : cumulative. Offect 's more. severe. It cleprived pelitiener’s right of US constitution of the Sth, bth, aad [$44 Amendment