MEt, IF CURT -AppoatEd TRIAL CWNSEl ADMITTS ThAT ShE D NEyleCtEC
To woNfeR nith client ABout Peremptory staikes befire oR durins peremptory
Strike sesswr ,where deferdant uas KepT from beng in Curtroun?

@
HAs the Distaut covat erned iw not Allouny Coat Secunly officer
In his loy sheets, thr7 DuCumertE thA7 D efedNr ws ABSEr7 fRoM lOUpT
Duriny perem ptury Stake Sessio n? And futhermore hrs the Distict couat Eaned
IN not alloniy Coat Secvity ufficer to Testiy,& tuan And depy Defendes's
G2ss Reyuest fon no testemong cuncanny how the recandings re flected withe

HAS
APpellAnt Covn7 fon the Enyhth Circut erned, in No7 gluy
Intntual veger e Adegutely se?

Has the bre for Ineffetve AssistAe of Post -tanl Counsel duuy utituel
Neglect IN nor Coiny the Cor Security offcer To festif duany GudentARy
MeARIg UN 2IS, Where DistUT CURT gRANTED SUCh s heAR fU tes timog
of the officer to Be provided?

7
Beer voAEO uNytR the Sixth AMendmeNT w beIng ABSENT fa CRitigAl STge W
VAL Prceedigs? HAs A Critierl erron occred, A poceduRAl enevR by the AppeltE
Courr fon she Elyht OstRiy ANd Oistaior Cout fr Allowy the nemael of DefendANs
Fom conferaay with Counsel?

Whether the standard for ineffective assistance of counsel has been met when court-appointed trial counsel admits that she failed to confer with the client about potential plea bargains before a plea hearing where the defendant was kept in solitary confinement, and the district court did not allow the court security officer to testify about the accuracy of the log sheets that showed the defendant was absent from court during a grand jury session