Did the pury reasonably, logically and legally infer from the evid1.
ence presented, that petitioner was guilty of violating the statue
beyond a reasonable doubt?

Did petitioner's
2.
gury instructions on the law of principals relieved
the State of its Fourteenth Amendment burden of proving petitioner's
specific. intent to kill?

Was petitioner afforded effective assistance of caunsel in
3.
every proceeding of the trial ? Had Counsel only thirteen (i3daysprior
ta trial

Was appellate counsel effective for not raising petitiner's Faurth
4.
Amendment claim an direct appeal?

Did the courts below commit reversible err denying petitioner's 2254
disputes?

Did the court reasonably infer petitioner's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?