1. The Appellate disagrees with the DCA and a law they are citing. They stated in a
letter; All state-level appeals and collateral attacks on any judgment must be
completed within two years from the date of appeal. The lower court neglect and
mishandled Appellate's case delaying the time of judgment from 2 years to 5-6
years during which time was a world wide covid pandemic.

2. How can* defense attorney admittedly testify to having no communications with
his client to discuss her case and still not be found ineffective, when the sixth
Amendment imposes on counsel a duty to investigate, because reasonable
effective assistance must be based on professional decisions and informed legal
choices can only be made after investigation of options, there can be no strategic
choice that renders such an investigation unnecessary?

3. How can the U.S. Constitution Sixth Amendment provide defendant's a right to
obtain witnesses in his favor but defense refused to call any and the courts appeal
process deny this right to have witnesses?

4. How can the perjury laws be overlooked for the state witnesses, and the state
attorney knew of the lying but continue to use them as witnesses and the defense
attorney is not found ineffective for failing to bring witness perjury to the jury's
attention?

5. How can a recording of a recording done on a I-phone be admitted when the judge
stated "for the record the indicator read all zeroes. " Without time and date stamps
the date of origin or time of day is unknown. In addition the video had no
relevancy, the state had no idea what type of vehicle, what color it was or who
was driving the vehicle and could not see the licence place.

6. Judge Pader overlooked laws, case law and statues. She was misleading,
misreading and/or misquoting statements from transcripts like she either wasn't
paying attention, skimming the pages, or not taking very good notes when she
denied the post conviction. How can there be any confidence in her judicial
reasoning and accuracy when she mistaken details of issues in grounds, testimony
and law. This denial should not be allowed to stand with mistakes made.

7. The appellate has a dispute over inmates not being entitled to counsel once you
are in prison, as you are in the U.S. Constitution, Amendment 6 before prison.

Whether the trial court and appellate court violated petitioner's Sixth Amendment rights to effective assistance of counsel, to obtain witnesses in her favor, and to confront witnesses against her, and whether the court erred in admitting unreliable evidence and overlooking prosecutorial misconduct including witness perjury