Is the Idaho state court in violation of the Brady-v-maryland rule by changing the evidence, contrary to uncontroverted evidence, in dismissing the third component of a Brady violation that obviates 'reasonable probability of a different verdict'?

Questions Presented 1. Is the Idaho state court in violation of the rule in Brady v. Maryland by changing the evidence, contrary to uncontroverted evidence, in dismissing the third component of a Brady violation that obviates “reasonable probability of a different verdict”? 2. When pursuant to the Uniform Post Conviction Procedure Act, where only a preponderance of evidence is required, does the standard of reasonable probability become more attainable when only a preponderance of evidence is the threshold? 3. Is the State of Idaho in conflict with Federal laws and other States where duress negates criminal intent? i II. Related Cases 1. Stephen Lundquist v. State of Idaho, Docket No. 49532-2022, Supreme Court of the State of Idaho. Order Denying Petition for Review and Motion to Augment the Record entered November 27, 2023. 2. Stephen Lundquist v. State of Idaho, Docket No. 49532-2022, Court of . Appeals of the State of Idaho. Opinion on Appeal entered August 30, 2023. 3. Stephen Lundquist v. State of Idaho, CV01-19-7369, District Court of the Fourth Judicial District of the State of Idaho, in and for the County of Ada. Opinion on Appeal entered December 22, 2021. “4 Stephen Lundquist v. State of Idaho, CV01-19-7369, District Court of the Fourth Judicial District of the State of Idaho, in and for the County of Ada. ; Order Denying Post Conviction Relief entered March }, 2021. ; 5. State v. Lundquist, CR01-19-00061, District Court of the Fourth Judicial , District of the State of Idaho, in and for the County of Ada. Judgment entered March 28, 2019. , 6. State v. Lundquist, CR01-18-30736, District Court of the Fourth Judicial District of the State of Idaho, in and for the County of Ada. Judgment entered August 15, 2018. ii . III.