whether-escobar-vs-texas-applies-retroactively

Question Presented : 1, Whether Escobar vs. Texas, 143 S.ct 557 (January 9 2023) The use of “material false testimony” to jurors by its States forensic fingerprint expert should apply retroactively to Oklahoma State convictions that were final when Escobar was ' announced. The Question(s) presented are: 2. Whether a State Consistent with the Sixth and Fourteenth amendment of the united States Constitution. allows a trial court in the state of Oklahoma to “abuse its discretion” by its failure to use the proper standard in determining whether to grant or deny the Petitioner motion for First Post-Conviction D.N.A. testing. 22 0.S. (2013) §§ 1373.1-1373.7 such as: Favorable presumption and/or considering (a)ll the evidence produced at trial along with any newly discovered evidence and the impact that and exculpatory DNA test could have had in light of this evidence. This State law Requires a decision by this court which consequently will stop the conflict among the Federal Court and State courts of last resort such as State vs. Crumpton,332 P.3d 448 (2014). 3. Whether and to what extent the 14** amendment due process clause applies to PostConviction D.N.A. Proceedings to determine whether a prisoner conviction would be set aside and/or modified upon favorable results of D.N.A. testing. This case particularly concerns the State of Oklahoma First, Motion for Post-Conviction D.N.A. testing, 22 0.S. (2013) §§ 1373.1-1373.7. where a liberty interest has been established under § 1373.5(A) “it allows for the vacation of a conviction or other relief. This statue is not an amendment to the original Post-Conviction act 22 0.5. § 1080(a)-(f) and the fact the (0.C.C.A) will deny any indigent defendant the right to appeal his appointed counsel was ineffective during the hearing. This State law Requires a decision by this court which consequently will stop the conflict among the Federal Court and State courts of last resort such as Greenholtz vs. Inmates of the Nebraska Penal and Correctional complex,442 U.S. 1 (1979). 4. Whether the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals Properly applied the Standard articulated in William vs. Pennsylvania, 579 U.S. 1 (2016) in cases where a showing of actual subjective Bias is not required to establish a Fourteenth amendment due process violation. 5. Whether Escobar vs. Texas, 143 S.ct 557 (January 9" 2023) States DNA (Standard of Proof) should apply retroactively to Oklahoma State convictions that were final when Escobar was announced. a decision by this court which consequently, will affect the constitutional rules governing the operation of all State and Federal Courts with lower and/or higher DNA (Standard of Proof). 4 ii