1. Does the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee an indigent Petitioner to the Sixth Amendment right to the assistance of Counsel during School factual innocence Proceedings, Which requires New Scientific evidence not presented at trial, and not are sufficient like a trial in the adversarial format and in the existance of Standards for decision, as recognized by Strickland during Capital Sentencing Proceedings?

2. Does the Due Process Clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, in conjunction with the Notice and fair trial guarantees of the Sixth Amendment, as prescribed by Zoes and Agends, Place an affirmative duty on the Government to preserve Constitutional Material evidence to an essential element of an offense, or to any fact necessary that increases the maximum penalty for a crime?

3. Does a State Courts Reversal to accept an Indigent Petitioner's Motions for Counsel, Applications for expert assistance, Consider New Scientific evidence and Witness declarations, Provide an evidentiary hearing or allow a hearing for opportunity to demonstrate ones innocence When Presented With a Clear Miscarriage of justice Constitute the Unconstitutional Withholding of Habeas Corpus in Violation of the Due Process and Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?

Does the Due Process Clause guarantee an indigent petitioner the Sixth Amendment right to the assistance of counsel during actual innocence proceedings, which requires new scientific evidence not presented at trial, and are sufficiently like a trial in its adversarial format and the existence of standards for decision, as recognized by Strickland during capital sentencing proceedings?