Should CERTIORARI be granted to review the issues of whether the State violated Supreme Court precedent by having a sentencing judge, not the jury, make a decision that the offenses were on separate occasions which made a huge difference in sentence, and whether the Ninth Circuit panel should have granted a motion to stay the appeal to allow the appellant to exhaust the issue raised by the state Supreme Court

QUESTION PRESENTED Should CERTIORARI be granted to review the following issues: 1) Did the State Violate Supreme Court precedent of Apprendi v. New Jersey and Alleyene v. United States by having a sentencing judge not the jury make a decision the offenses were on separate occasions which made a huge difference in sentence from concurrent to consecutive? 2) Should the Ninth Circuit panel have granted the motion to stay the appeal to allow appellant to exhaust the issue raised by the state Supreme Court which just granted review of the same issue which is before the federal court?