The Circuit Court arrod
tuopuapp
uoym
Procseing
b4
Wilkns was wearing his
untform whon
apow 9y
Jail
Counsdlor for the
a tinly obrection
6etoro
/011
dotendont slso mace an
The cothes MrWilkin
ojoction
Was WeEtng WaS vory muCh
1danti4126/60
4ail to 4ile
Inetfoctiuo
assistance 04
Counso/
tailer to strike Mr Vinsn testiony of tape ho serd he
p3y
traito
Counse/ not perporo for sentencing
t3
withess on dotsradantbohalfe
Counsb/ not
sutpooning
Coysel mokins
slanlorous and
dorogatory Commant
sb04 delondkent Charaetor
9 uny
131470
telling
Counsel addross another
udge
P
needecd tobs roMouoc
ator
Shalclnt ho hed bo romood of the start trisl.

Whether the petitioner's Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated by the court's errors, including failure to strike testimony, failure to subpoena witnesses, and making slanderous and prejudicial comments