WHETHER THE STATE DEPRIVED PETITIONER OF HIS GUARANTEED RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL WHEN IT PERMITTED THE PROSECUTION TO INTRODUCE TO THE TRIAL JURY A BUNCH OF GUNS, DRUGS, DRUG PARAPHERNALIA, AND A WHITE RESISTANCE/ANARCHIST MANUAL ("WRAM") FOUND AT PETITIONER'S HOME, IN LIGHT OF THE MATERIAL FACT THAT THESE EXTREMELY PREJUDICIAL ITEMS WERE UNRELATED TO THE CASE, HAD NO RELEVANCE TO THIS CASE AND WAS SIMPLY INTRODUCED FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE OF STRIPPING PETITIONER OF HIS "ACTUAL INNOCENCE" INFLAMING THE JURY WHILE CASTING PETITIONER AS A BAD PERSON, WITH VIEWS THAT MANY OF THE JURORS MAY HAVE FOUND TO BE OFFENSIVE AND NOT SHARED BY THE MASSES; THEREFORE ENTITLING PETITIONER TO HABEAS RELIEF, THE GRANTING OF A NEW TRIAL AND/OR REMANDING THIS MATTER TO THE DISTRICT COURT FOR AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING IN ACCORDANCE WITH TOWNSEND, MARTINEZ, STRICKLAND, McMANN AND THE SIXTH AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION?

WHETHER PETITIONER MET HIS BURDEN OF ESTABLISHING A PRIMA FACIE CASE THAT HE WAS DEPRIVED OF HIS GUARANTEED RIGHT TO "THE EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL" WHEN COUNSEL FAILED TO ADVISE PETITIONER THAT HIS REJECTION OF THE 15-30 YEARS IMPRISONMENT PLEA OFFER COULD RESULT IN A MORE SEVERE PUNISHMENT, IF FOUND GUILTY, THUS, VIOLATING LAFLER, FRYE, MARTINEZ, STRICKLAND, McMANN AND THE SIXTH AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION ENTITLING PETITIONER TO HABEAS RELIEF, THE GRANT OF A NEW TRIAL AND/OR REMAND FOR AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING IN ACCORDANCE WITH TOWNSEND AND MARTINEZ, THE SIXTH AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION AND FOR A FAIR AND FULL OPPORTUNITY TO DEVELOP A FACTUAL RECORD TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CLAIMS?

Whether the state deprived petitioner of his guaranteed right to a fair trial