Whether the Fifth Circuit erroneously applied federal law in finding sufficient evidence to establish crimes beyond a reasonable doubt and in ruling on due process, confrontation, and evidentiary issues

I. Did the Fifth Circuit erroneously apply federal law in finding that the evidence at trial was sufficient to establish the crimes beyond a reasonable doubt, when the evidence failed to prove Petitioner was a part of the conspiracy alleged in this case. II. Did the Fifth Circuit erroneously apply federal law in finding that Petitioner’s rights to due process and confrontation under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments were not violated when the district court allowed Michael Crawford to testify as to things he heard in jail, essentially functioning as a government agent. III. Did the Fifth Circuit erroneously apply federal law in finding that Petitioner’s rights to due process and a fair trial under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments were not violated when the district court denied his motion to sever Defendants. IV. Did the Fifth Circuit erroneously apply federal law and ignore a possible circuit split in finding no error in the district court allowing the government to introduce extrinsic evidence before the jury in violation of Rule 404(b), violating Louis Age, III’s due process rights, and requiring a new trial. V. Petitioner adopts the arguments of co-Petitioners to the extent they do not conflict. QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW I. Did the Fifth Circuit erroneously apply federal law in finding that the evidence at trial was sufficient to establish the crimes beyond a reasonable doubt, when the evidence failed to prove Petitioner was a part of the conspiracy alleged in this case. II. Did the Fifth Circuit erroneously apply federal law in finding that Petitioner’s rights to due process and confrontation under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments were not violated when the district court allowed Michael Crawford to testify as to things he heard in jail, essentially functioning as a government agent. III. Did the Fifth Circuit erroneously apply federal law in finding that Petitioner’s rights to due process and a fair trial under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments were not violated when the district court denied his motion to sever Defendants. IV. Did the Fifth Circuit erroneously apply federal law and ignore a possible circuit split in finding no error in the district court allowing the government to introduce extrinsic evidence before the jury in violation of Rule 404(b), violating Louis Age, III’s due process rights, and requiring a new trial. V. Petitioner adopts the arguments of co-Petitioners to the extent they do not conflict.