Question not identified

Questions Presented J.__Petitionee has presented thoto key state’ widness 10:45 usin cellphone while —Festiing againch peltiooer at dein Petitioner was convicted solely an-heaesay testimony — —___Piid_the Fifth Ciecvit_ere ia oleayin “ed cpcaing a Rpg Eel pha hile tag ab tial?” Dal Distt Cur einandapig tenn ——teport that no_evielentio®y hearing waste wicednoonyceliet warrant ol_becavse —thece thal the tried judge obsenced wvitnessrsing the — Cell phone_eventhou bh ti .0(2) 6m senottidayits wiecesubmitted by trial sucience members Lean that abby ehatin thal they Cleaely-taw the witiress using-—cel phone theentice time while Hettijing? 2. te coccoborate their mainwitness testimony thet Petitioner useol the purple cloth to wipe away evidence of the crime. DNA results _ ——p.covedthot Petitionée's DNP but the stole’ moin witness’ DNA wes _preseaton the purple cloth: Fibect from the punpleclath were tound ——on_the metal money-box thetwasrobbed_of the victim. Did the bth Cinesit ert in deoying 0 loh_conceening Covcleacia.adoptin that — nck object 4a the purple cloth being adailtDdinte evidence-that this Prrecldes Petitioner from having the issue ceviemed that Reosecuters created «false impression ___of the eviolente? ~ 3-_-Fetitionte has_peeseated the thece is insufficient evidence +e suppoct the auilty ___veralict. Petitioner has presented specific _elements_of the crimethat tial evidlesce.diol tet andcovlolnot prove: Did] the Fifth Cincuid ere in denying -3.COA congernin thet being in<vHicient evident to suppocl eouh tlement of te ceime? Did Disbich Couch de sn. dePencin —— ___to_stote court £indin Ss thed Pobitinnen did not briag the instfiency of exidence ise pia sda praceedicds® Did Dishih Caveh ocr in Dob ca nizing thei Petition ec diol ato ck the insuffviesdy of the evidence af the elements obDhe cme in his pra se ——sepplemental brick in thet — the heading-of the issue os “wei it of the evidPce” ingtead of “issu Hhiciency of the evidences ( ; J ; ao Questions Presented “1-_Fnsecutars displayed 9 phete of the cleceased visdim ducing closing oeauiments Did the Fifth Greviterrin_olen ing-2 COA tonsacning prosecsitocs_ displaying a picdce ob clecensed vickim dung clad canmentst Did Distrieh Court err ia adopting thod theclisplay of this phate cagld clude closing _acouments _whileprosectors —relarced bo Pebibioner aso 'cald-bleadbd tiles" ddlnal_opleatty aftecd Petdoaece that his trial counsel was inettective for failin -tecall-qny—__ —— mbar of witresis ha-hed-oleeady.4 nen Sbbements tn lan-enlacemest that a 22 —parcty-hod committed eerie: —— Did the S> Gcesit ee in_deayiog a Cod concennin _counsel_ bein ineffective Eat calngany ont ab any palin -nstonses nhsrbad aleady iaplnteda 3 party be the crime? Did District Courkenein deferring ts the state cout —Eiadins Hed edibinwn was t-nek_pexdliced by bi-trial cDunsolt ailare-da-call 904 tvihnesses who would-haveclicectly implicated_o 3 pocty9s the person who Committed the ccime including one witness that admitted +o deivingthe 3° ——pacty to the crime scene to commit the cicime? Se) Retitioner has_presented thot prosecutors submitted o_puicpleclath inteevidence that — ——_theic_oaia witness testitied that Petitioner used +e wipe away Cvidense_ot the crime: Fhers_ — from this purple cloth wece found attached +o the metal money bosthat was robbed of ——the victim: Later o DMA expect testified that Petitioner's DNA _wasnot present on the clot but the posevetors? main witness’ DNA wos preseaton the pusple cloth The DMA tests pave thet the mainwitoesswas_lyia about Petitioner_ond that the main_witness was actualy the individual vho-posseiseP jad wiped aff dhe salen maacy boY as canealed hy the fact thet the cloths Fibers were found ottached to the money boy Pid the Bith Creuil ere in-desying COA conescrin counsel being ineffective far yan fo adequately use this valuable Ampeochneat aad Lrculpable ecderce? Jd Dashed Cac ee inadebecsng ta the sete cauct Ladags thal Betoer a tat perus