Reasonable jurists would determine that defense counsel rendered ineffective assistance of counsel when he failed to: A) object to the introduction of Mr. Lowe's statements and other crimes evidence. The defendant was prejudiced by counsel's deficient performance for tilling to request a hearing under LSA-C.E. Art- 403, 404 B; and B) defense counsel rendered ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to obtain an Independent Expert Witness to refute the State Expert Witness's testimony; and C) retained trial counsel failed to investigate the evidence presented.

Jurists of reason would debate Mr. Lowe is Actual/Legal Innocent of the convictions of Aggravated Rape, Sexual Battery and Indecent Behavior; and Mr. Lowe's Newly Discovered Evidence of False Accusations has been obtained through Due Diligence.

Reasonable jurists would find that Mr. Lowe was prejudiced by the State suppressing or destroying the original taped statement of K.S. from evidence.

Reasonable jurists would determine that the evidence is legally insufficient to sustain his convictions for Aggravated Rape under the "Oral Sexual Intercourse" provisions of LSA-RS. 14:42.

S. Reasonable jurist would determine that the use of Mr. Lowes statement to police against him at trial violated his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment rights under the United States Constitution.

Ineffective-assistance-of-counsel