Whether the Oklahoma court of criminal appeals erred in rejecting constitutional errors under Brady and Napue and depriving the jury of critical evidence that would have established innocence

1. whether the Oklahoma court of criminal appeals erred in rejecting confessed constitutional errors under Brady and Napue and giving not weight to the State's considered view that Petitioner's trial was infected by serious constitutional error and prosecutorial misconduct. 2. Whether the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals erred by depriving the jury critical evidence that would have established his innocence. The district court declined to reach the petitions merits, holding Dunbar could not satisfy the threshold showing of actual innocence required by Sawyer v. Whitley, 505 U.S. 333,336,112 S. Ct. 2514,2417,120 L.Ed. 2d 260, under which a petitioner must demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that, but for constitutional error, no reasonable juror would have found him guilty 3 . Timing is factor relevant in evaluating reliability of Petitioner's proof of innocence 4. Jurisdiction; the federal question pertaining to the state courts, is did the prosecuting agencies have jurisdiction to prosecute a tribal member on Federal Reservation Land on the Cheyenne Arapaho Reservation.