1. ) Statement of the Case and exhaustion of claims pursuant to 28USC section 2254(b)(1)(A) as delineated in S.Ct. Rule 20.4(a). Where, in my petition (notarized and submitted into ADOC legal mail on 7/28/25, and stamped received by the Honorable Court on 8/6/25 ) I addressed my claim of new evidence of steroid psychosis (i.e. prescription steroid induced brain structure changes in regions dealing with rage/fight/flight) which if seen in my brain MRIs (already in possession of the State) would (with my medical history of longterm prescription steroid use) mitigate intent, which is an essential element of my crime. I discuss that I exhausted my claims in state court, and the fact that my habeas on new evidence was adjudicated as successive, eventhough my first habeas did not assert steroid psychosis per se, did not have this new evidence, and was adjudicated as procedurally defaulted and out of time, and thus could not get fair adjudication of my habeas corpus at the District Court level and thus have to approach Honorable Court. I will include this as a separate statement to follow, as per S.Ct. Rule 14, as requested by the Honorable Clerk Harris with his 8/7/25 letter, which I received in ADOC legal mail the night of 8/12/25.

2. ) Even post AEDPA U.S. Supreme Court has jurisdiction to adjudicate Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus as original matter as per 28USC section 2241(a), 2254(a) as delineated in Rule 20.4(a) (Felker v Turpin 518 US 651, 661-63, 135 LEd 2d 827, 116 S.Ct. 2333 (1996) [OPINION} II.

a. ) Supreme Court has jurisdiction to entertain Writ of Habeas Corpus after petitioner has been denied Circuit Court permission to file a second or successive petition with the US District Court, as per In re Davis 565 F.3d 810 (llCirc.) [OPINION] II.

b. ) Timeliness of submission to the Supreme Court the Petition of Writ of Habeas Corpus bestows jurisdiction to the Supreme Court.

3. ) In order for the US Supreme Court to grant a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, the petition must fulfill S.Ct. Rule 20.4(a) and its included 28 USC rules, all of which my petition fulfills, as I have illustrated throughout this petition.

4. ) As per 28 USC 2254 d) Writ of Habeas Corpus will not be granted on any claims adjudicated on the merits unless (d)(1) adjudication was contrary or unreasonable application of federal law, OR (d)(2) adjudication was based on unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in State court proceedings. In the petition I stated that neither this habeas (on my new evidence) nor my first habeas were adjudicated on the merits, but I argued 2254 (d) (1) and (2) to assert merits of my claims.

a. ) My capital murder charge (and even lesser included felony murder-not offered at trial) and mv attempted murder charges have specific intent as an essential

Whether a habeas corpus petition alleging new evidence of steroid psychosis can overcome procedural default and demonstrate a lack of specific intent in a capital murder conviction