Whether the petitioner's constitutional rights were violated by the court's refusal to allow him to present evidence and witnesses in his defense

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED Win is 7 A Cane p ( ; oeichirsd a at ouceck to stanol in Yxce o® Clear Cronic ound Niolutions, Chtar novo wordline, and Constituctonal Vioigds OM. oP nich wold Kaw Chan dhe ‘cel 2) Melarions} ko amt Rar cond larore ol tor and consistantly, cllowsd ; ; Lar Constitubdhal Violet; a neo woidance wihicly does hol Naw a Statute P Limitysly ieltens ap nwolere O win, ound Yhualy Sen them ? Aw is Oo Ouse ablousid bo shard iin Var Cae & Clee Conic cmd Constitutional vilatoms-2 conich coould nave Charged re corktonm Oe te lial? Use o Tin Per anc ignore. Cliar Conch lwhoral Violations and. voor nis openana, cshademuntes Hayek his Claerre is pyle inclecol— Que Pring, tipeet ation Bias PR Uae nal tute bgdames— aul to olpkews any woltnrsses expect or luunaain=0 ubal? Guill _vmh\ Proven lenoeink insti J Innocent wotil Prove Guill? Xo _oreuc tolwn Yoo oc attornwy Vor Abs Pebttone celucntc lo dhe Caunlsiatrick DUor res on Ye scm code Uroe4 weer tre DeCnae Ap pallat