MAY A CONVICTION THAT IS ADMITTEDLY A VIOLATION OF THE CONCURTRENT SENTENCE DOCTRINE BE ALLOWED TO STAND IN LIGHT OF RAY V. UNITED STATES, ,481 U.S. 736 (1987)?

WHETHER THE SIXTH AMENDMENT IS IMPLICATED WHERE THE DISTRICT COURT ERRONEOUS SENTENCING DETERMINATION UNLAWFULLY INCREASED DEFENDANTS SENTENCING IN LIGHT OF THIS COURT'S DECISION IN GLOVER V UNITED STATES, .531 Z. S., (2001)?

WHETHER IN LIGHT OF THE REVERED STATUS OF THE BEYOND-AREASONABLE-DOUBT STANDARD, CAN A CONVICTION WHERE THE ELEMENT OF THE OFFENSE MAY NOT HAVE BEEN FOUND AGAINST THE DEFENDANT BY SUCH STANDARD BE OVERLOOKED IN LIGHT OF IN re.WINSHIP, 397 U.S.358 (1970)?

IV: WHETHER PETITIONER'S CONVICTION AND SENTENCE OF BOTH 21 U.S.C.841(a) AND 860 VIOLATED THE DOUBLE JEOPARDY CLAUSE IN LIGHT OF THE "SAME EVIDENCE RULE" ADOPTED IN BLOCKBURGER V.UNITED STATES, 284 U.S.299(1932)?

V. IS DUE PROCESS VIOLATED WHEN A PROSECUTOR HAS AN AFFIRMATIVE DUTY TO DISCLOSE ANY EXCULPATORY AND IMPEACHMENT EVIDENCE KNOWN TO ANY AGENT/OFFICER INVOLVED IN THE TTRIAL, BUT FAILED TO DO SO IN LIGHT OF KYLES V. WHITLEY, 514 US.419 (1995)?

May a conviction that is admittedly a violation of the concurrent-sentence-doctrine be allowed to stand in light of Ray-v-United-States