1. DID THE FOURTH CIRCUIT COURT
OF APPEALS ERR IN FINOING THAT
PETITIONER FAILED TO STATE A
CLAIM OF THE DENIAL OF A CONSTITUTIONAL WHERE THE STATE
FAILED TO PROVIDE BRADY MATERIAL IN THE FORM OF A LETTER
FROM A JAILHOUSE SNITCH UNTIL
A POST-TRIAL MOTION FOR A NEW
TRIAL HEARING?

2. WERE THE STATE AND FEDERAL
COURTS' DECISTONS CONTRARY TO GIGLIO, BAGLEY, BRADY AND NAPONE V.
ILLINOIS WHERE THE STATE FAILED
TO DISCLOSE MATERIAL IMPEACHMENT EUIDENCE IN THE FORM OF
A JAILHOUSE SNITCH LETTER AND
TESTIMONY WAS THAT PETITIONER
CONFESSED TO HIM?

3. DID THE STATE AND FEDERAL
COURTS ERR IN FINDING THAT
TRIAL COUNSEL RENDERED EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE
WHERE HE
FAILED TO INTERVIEW MICHAEL
JONES AND CALL HIM AS A
WITNESS?

Did the courts err in finding that petitioner failed to state a claim of the denial of a constitutional right where the state failed to provide Brady material in the form of a jailhouse snitch letter until a post-trial motion for a new trial hearing?