Whether the trial court violated Mr. Saved's procedural and substantive due process rights by failing to hold a competency hearing and allowing him to be tried while incompetent, and whether he received ineffective assistance of counsel

1) Whether The Doyle v. Ohio. 426 U.S. 610 (1976) violation had a substantial and injurious effect in determining the jury ’s verdict? 2) Whether the trial Court violated Mr. Saved ’s procedural due process rights in failing to hold a competency hearing; and his substantive due process rights in allowing him to be tried even though he was incompetent? Did Mr. Saved receive ineffective assistance of counsel when counsel failed to 3) interview and introduce testimony of witnesses? Did Mr. Saved receive ineffective assistance of counsel when counsel failed to consult 4) with an expert witness? Whether a defendant must admit to the conduct underlying the charged offense to 5) be entitled to a self-defense jury instruction, and if so, whether admitting to push a correctional officer admits the conduct for secondand third-degree assault? 6) Is a pro-se prisoner litigant entitled to liberal construction, which includes readiness into his claim the strongest argument suggested, in this case which is the trial counsel deprived Mr. Saved of his autonomous right to control the objectives of his defense. l.