Whether the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause requires retroactive application of a new rule of law in criminal resentencing, and whether constitutional protections preclude convictions without proof beyond a reasonable doubt

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause requires a State to apply to the resentencing of a criminal defendant, a rule of law defining an element of a criminal offense that was new with respect to the case when announced in the decision on direct appellate review, but was no longer new at the time of resentencing. 2. Whether, pursuant to the Second Amendment right to possess a handgun and ammunition in one’s home, and the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process right against conviction except on proof beyond a reasonable doubt of every fact necessary to convict, precludes convictions for illegal possession of a handgun and illegal possession of ammunition where the prosecution has failed to demonstrate by proof beyond a reasonable doubt that a criminal defendant failed to possess adequate documentation of a legal right to possess such items. 3. Whether conviction as a co-conspirator of the offense of armed home invasion as an individual acting on the “remote outer fringes” of the alleged conspiracy violates Fourteenth Amendment Due Process. 4. Whether, where the prosecution alleges an offense of felony murder based on alleged underlying crimes of armed home invasion and attempted armed robbery, prohibitions against Double Jeopardy under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments 2 preclude separate convictions of armed home invasion and felony murder, where any threatened use of force alleged to have occurred as part of conduct constituting armed home invasion or attempted armed robbery, was part of a shooting that killed a decedent. 5. Whether for purposes of opposing a government assertion of estoppel in an appeal from resentencing in a criminal case, a criminal case remains pending on direct review of a defendant’s original convictions and sentence until the conclusion of the appeal from resentencing. 6. Whether an appellate court’s determination to permit conviction of a criminal . offense to stand regardless of any potential constitutional violation inherent in said conviction solely because the sentence ordered as to such conviction has previously been served violates principles of Fourteenth Amendment Due Process, and principles of Double Jeopardy protected under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. 3