Whether the trial court violated Petitioner's due process rights by joining unrelated cases and improperly admitting prejudicial testimony

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED i . : L The trial court violated [Petitioner’s] right to due process—denied him his . . right to a fair trial by joining the unrelated: cases, of aggravated indecent = exposure which each carriéd’ #sécond. count of indecent exposure by a . ‘sexually delinquent person: and thé joi [dJer resulted in unfair prejudice, ‘TO. ‘The trial court abused it[}s discretion and denied [Petitioner] his due process right to a fair trial by admitting evidence of past acts that should not have * been admissible pursuant to MCR 4046). . : ° UL [Petitioner] did not reo[ci]ve'.the: adequate assistance of counsel in fulfillment of his TV. [Petitioner] claims that, diring ~ opening statements, the prosecutor improperly referenced the ‘testiiniony of a professor and a police. officer regarding the 2003 incident. at Keridall College. Specifically, [Petitioner] : : "asserts that the prosécutér’s. comments violated his Sixth Amendment right ~ : to confrontation because neither the professor nor the police officer testified . ; at trial. [Petitioner] ‘also claims that defense counsel was ineffective for failing to move for a mistrial based on the prosecutor’s opening statement. These comments were préjudicial to [Petitioner] and impaired his ability to ' have a fair trial. [Petitioner] ‘further claims that defense counsel was ineffective for failing to request a “cautionary instruction” or a “missing Witness instruction.” 7. an