Whether the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals ruling on an excited utterance hearsay exception violates the constitutional right to counsel, and whether a mandated court hearing constitutes a critical stage requiring appointed counsel

1. Whether the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals ruling that an omitted claim implicating an excited utterance, an exception to the hearsay rule, is meritless is in contrary to Petitioner ’s constitutional right to counsel on Petitioner ’s first appeal as of right calling into question Oklahoma ’s Post Conviction Procedures Act codified at OKLA. STAT. T.22, § 1080 et seq.. 2. Whether a mandated court hearing constitutes a critical stage implicating the right to appointment of counsel calling into question Oklahoma ’s Postconviction DNA Act codified at OKLA. STAT. T.22, § 1373 et seq. (2015). 1