Can the lower court courts indiscriminately deny (timely) filed Federal habeas corpus (2261) of newly discovered evidence wherein the newly discovered evidence proves that the District Attorney's Office outright lied to have petitioner convicted, on the jury's main quest during deliberations wherein petitioner has proof by way of the grand jury report that he did not attack complainant with a knife?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED The United Stortes Court of Appeals forthe Fi Ath Grey 6nd the United Slots District Court for the Westen District of Toas hes entered 0 Oledision in Conflic+With 0. oleetsiea bY 0 Stele Court of lastresart ond this Courks (20 holdings and) Mow S0 far deportes) From the accepted anal LSval Course.’ OF uiclad 0 beealings as 10 Call for an exervise &+this Courts supervisory Power. L) Con the lower obra! Courks indliseriminatel deny oftimel)) Piled Feder! hobeos corpus (2261) of Newl Discovered! Evioence wherein the newoly chistovered evioknie proves that the District AHomars OFF ve outright ied 40 have pettHoner Convicted, onthe, jury's Moin guest Curing dkliberyrbios Wherein DetHoner hos prooby way of th ree gD hie report thet he did noteteek ComplainorHwith a Knife? Moreover, pefrtloner hos of of his Tnnocente by luny of new Cliscovered e-mail. 2.) Con a stot high court completel, abrogate this Count Orecedentical ‘ling under the-Sufficienay of the evidence C Ticker nv Vin into) oF 19°79 and Use-ex past Reto (etre-achive low fom 1965 (nem v. Sait, ail Sw.20 fa'Yte uphold petFioner’'s unlawful] Convi , wherein +he ni a ad gen 1 ri to "aout on Conphning the ust of ex 3) Con the Federal Courts Wefuse to mokethe Stok high Court answer the Lst of perwwed ( lse-and misleooling) fate) Wherein Sudh efRosive use Woes Used to onviet ioner~ onol 0 New Change, lo-Covrt of the State lowered thethresholol oF perjury in “This pittedental Cose Ex Oorke Chavez, (Tex. Crim Ap 209