1. Did the Ninth Circuit err by finding that there was sufficient evidence for interstate commerce when the underlying acts did not have even a "de minimus" effect on interstate commerce.

2. Did the Ninth Circuit err by finding that the pretrial identification of Mr. Brown was not unnecessarily suggestive and conducive when Mr. Brown was the sole suspect, in handcuffs, surrounded by police officers.

3. Did the Ninth Circuit err when it sentenced Mr. Brown to a career offender guideline obtained through an Alford plea, and Nevada robbery was recently ruled as not qualifying as a predicate crime of violence.

Did the Ninth Circuit err by finding sufficient evidence for interstate commerce when the underlying acts did not have a de minimus effect?