WHETHER the lower courts, hearing the petitioner's Constitutional claims of "actual innocence" and "theory of defense" instructions delivered to the trial jury, ERRED Constitutionally by repeatedly recharacterizing and deliberately FAILING to judicially notice the petitioner's actual questions, or providing full prudential consideration to those Constitutional claims?

WHETHER the petitioner is Constitutionally entitled to have the defense proposed instruction, that a full statement of.. "the Law" on the theory of defense' be included in the court's charge to the jury; and whether the court's neglect to deliver such full statement is sufficient reason for reversal?

Whether the lower courts erred in recharacterizing and failing to fully consider the petitioner's constitutional claims of actual innocence and theory of defense instructions