Whether petitioner's 6th and 14th amendment rights were violated

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED (1) WHETHER PETITIONER’S 67 AND 147! AMENDMENT RIGHTS WERE VIOLATED UNDER THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATE ACT OF 1979, WHEN A REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION FROM THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE WAS NOT FILED DURING PETITIONER'S 2254 PROCEEDINGS @) WHETHER PETITIONER’S 67 AND 147 AMENDMENT RIGHTS WERE VIOLATED UNDER STRICKLAND BY TRIAL COUNSEL’S DEFICIENT PERFORMANCE IN FAILING TO SUBPOENA THE TESTIMONY OF THE CASE ATTEMPTED MURDER VICTIM WHO POSSESSED AND FIRED [A]JNOTHER .22 WEAPON DURING THE CASE SHOOTING; WHICH TESTIMONY BY STATE WITNESSES SUGGEST WAS THE .22 WEAPON THAT FIRED THE FATAL SHOT (3) WHETHER PETITIONER’S 6™ AND 14™ AMENDMENT WERE VIOLATED BY THE APPELLATE COURT, UNDER THE “INNOCENCE EXCEPTION TO THE PROCEDURAL DEFAULT” PETITIONER MADE A SUBSTANTIAL SHOWING TO PROCEED ON HIS “GATEWAY ACTUAL INNOCENCE” CLAIM SCHLUP WHERE AN “EYEWITNESS” AND “CRITICAL PHYSICAL EVIDENCE WAS NOT PRESENTED AT TRIAL” i