WHETHER, WHEN A STATE POST-CONVICTION COURT DECIDES THAT
COUNSEL DID NOT NEED TO TAKE SOME ACTION UNDER STATE LAW TO
BE EFFECTIVE, THE STATE COURT DECISION IS A DECISION THE
FEDERAL COURT IS "BOUND TO ACCEPT" BECAUSE IT IS A STATE COURT
"INTERPRETATION OF STATE LAW."

WHETHER MR. WEIDNER DEMONSTRATED THAT THE POST-CONVICTION
COURT'S DENIAL OF HIS INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF APPELLATE
COUNSEL CLAIM IS OBJECTIVELY UNREASONABLE BECAUSE THE LAW
AND FACTS ESTABLISH APPELLATE COUNSEL'S DUTY TO SEEK ANY
OPPORTUNITY TO OBTAIN THE BENEFITS OF THE NEW RULE BEFORE HIS
CONVICTION BECAME FINAL.

Whether state court decision on state law is binding on federal court