Whether the lower court's erroneous view of law amounted to a miscarriage of justice that warrants Supreme Court review

aC Uxe ^resevAeX evidences?.V^beAker V>oV^5 0.ouvAk ciV>u£>e \Vs AisereVinn bnseA _As_ Vultvxo^ on on erroneous \/ieuJ oQ \o.ui AmaunA er kcAA/s CouA ’s overlook pyoce; CnvnmAVeA ploAn ewer (MrA erconeou^ OL^VvCGiVio n or in ^er^ceAck^A_on — re ievcw\\r tauj | ru\\.v\(7^ ,Al\cA Stolen ne^oVtoAAe vA-e^WkS HI; UolUs Oauv -Vs ro>rAr<xA\cAeA Vke ruVmc^ ^resenVeA on QAossi^ v» 0KL.V\ o»acl ^ S-Q4k!2. ? cv*xA Nq.^>ue, y« xHmoiSi in orAe_r Ar> Cover Vke oukrovqeous yvu sCox AucAoA Akf--