/. JTE fy d Las '£> 8X. EdctSE kus fa<fL'f
<D/i iaj i/o / ur^f-aAy f
it£ sdtil HaiaiIauJ & CcAfS'ki'kxj'ifOMa / A-t£jlil~ /o
E-fk :tt±h\j&. A ss i S^AAtoL S'biArJ Ly Cj>ums&L ?it> p/ioceed -p/U5 3£rf Afltit \/t>fvA*LttAy
c>ts
_L/0£5 fit 'fi/U)C£SS Aa,J £z^vaI fl/Lo fi AJ
Q-Laus LS A JA/Ars)l £k.Q&h if-AKrl d^lay /a/
pos'f'- (Loaj V i C.'/tOA/ <^3 Ajd ClP£<J > aicjs 'jo/t
tdA/jls A Afd 'sJtovfcJ f~lt pstcfy / A^a I d f A uS £
*a?<A>
ISo L £ /H p{t H EkI

Whether a criminal defendant's right to effective assistance of counsel is violated by a post-conviction delay that impedes access to legal remedies and potentially prejudices the defendant's ability to challenge their conviction