Whether the State courts's doctrine of res judicata was applied adequately after it summarily denies Pendleton's pro se filings of the successive habeas corpus petitions without a hearing

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether the State courts's doctrine of res judicata was applied adequately after it summarily denies Pendleton's pro se filings of the successive habeas corpus petitions without a hearing. Does this violates Pendleton's due process rights under the U.S. Constitution? 2. Whether trial and appellate counsels' were ineffective at failing to object and raise that Pendleton was not put on notice before and during trial by the lower court's jury instructions of constructively amending a charge with substantial elements not alleged in the indictment. Does this prejudice and deprives Pendleton of due process right to notice of charge. 3. Whether trial and appellate counsels' were ineffective at failing to object and raise that the charge under malicious assault did not aver particular intent according to : the terms of the statute. Does this prejudice and deprives Pendleton of due process right to notice of charge. 4. Whether trial and appellate counsels' were ineffective at failing to object and raise that the indictment failing at averring two addidional elements that would separate the greater from the lesser-included offense both charged against Pendleton. Does this prejudice Pendleton and is contrary to clearly established federal law. i |