REffiritenfs WflV'F tefilioN&tJfJ COMl^V^LAMof^CoiJ^ifoMoF^ Utifeb
CeuRfUftS ToRiSblClioiU Mteiu REfrfion/EA SEEK^AiJEublCATfBfJo^TffS Mer/1s QFUM
PefiKonl For a war or habeas CorFlK ?

itew^rc Court was tiRiSMcfariib Hm1hi$ ftrriMiMFte a wriTofMabfas corpus f/tebBl ?eWho HfisttorBzedtefMfilEbH fffe l^ifaSlAteS ft HMbB&M PftoftRLlAs AiJEne^I
toMBM'Mli'/wrfa/Altffifa 9Si)cHJbETE,RMii4fl7iobl^
^rit or Habeas Corpus 6Hdi/li> Be Court ?

I/i/HeTHeR. T'EfiTiOfifER 45 RCXoALL 1 fUlNOCEUT/ BY A pREPONbtltMiCE OtTHE EUlbEiJCE/ dFThE CRlME ^AREiEb 4$MT
FETtTiOfteR&l 1kf£ teshrtbtriTS 7

Ull/SfHeR^ doMEilf cP CbHUUiM EMTBREb BY THfi fesponlbBiJTS AWSf fcYiTioWeR (WK fi£FASlM?

HJriEftfEAT'HtS Reworitertis AtWifir PeiifiotJet?

Whether petitioner is actually innocent by a preponderance of the evidence of the crime charged against the respondents