Is Petitioner actually innocent and has a miscarriage of justice occurred?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED lL. Is Petitioner actually innocent and has a miscarriage of justice occurred? 2. Is the South Dakota Supreme Court’s overturning of their own precedent in State v. Reddick,' “insofar as it conflicts with this decision,” State v. Gard’an unforeseeable retroactive judicial enlargement of statute in violation of ex post facto prohibitions and Due Process? 3. Does the failure of the State to provide evidence of intent in any of the charges violate this Court’s holding in United States v. Booker,’ invalidate Petitioner’s conviction. 4. Does counsel’s inability to properly understand the law and present it at trial violate ; Petitioner’s Sixth Amendment right to reasonable counsel and fatally prejudice his case? 5. Does this Court’s decision in Lafler v. Cooper,* requiring counsel to meet Strickland v. Washington,’ standards during plea negotiations and at sentencing have retrospective application to set aside these convictions? , 6. If the State is unable to prove misappropriation of partnership funds, must this conviction be set aside? oo, 7. Must a State consider proportionality and the nature of the alleged offense in determining whether a sentence violates the Eighth Amendment prohibition against crue! and unusual punishment and the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees of Equal Protection and Due Process? ' State v. Reddick, 2 SD 124, 48 N.W. 846 (1891) ? State v. Gard, 742 N.W. 2d 254, 262 (SD 2007) ° United States v. Booker, 543 US 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 60 L.Ed. 2d 621, 2005 US LEXIS 628. ‘ Lafler v. Cooper, 566 US 156, 132 S.Ct. 1376, 182 L.Ed. 2d 398, 2012 US LEXIS 2322. * Strickland v. Washington, 466 US 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed. 2d 684, 1984 US LEXIS 1589. i