1)
DID THE CCA SO STRETCH THE FACTS IN THIS CASE SO
UNREASONABLY THAT NO DEFERENCE COULD BE POSSIBLE
TO ITS INTERPETATION OF WHAT OCCURRED IN THE TACO
RESTAURANT
PARKING LOT AND THE CASE SHOULD BE
EXAMINED DE NOVO BECAUSE OF THAT SATISFACTION OF
THE 2254(d)(2) EXCEPTION ?

2)
WAS TRIAL COUNSEL PREJUDICIALLY INEFFECTIVE IN
FAILING TO IMPEACH THE PROSECUTION CASE WITH
POLICE TESTIMONY THAT THE "VICTIMS" WERE
ACTUALLY THE AGRESSOR'S IN THIS CASE?

Did the CCA so stretch the facts in this case so unreasonably that no deference could be possible to its interpretation of what occurred in the taco restaurant parking lot and the case should be examined de novo because of that satisfaction of the 2254(d)(2) exception?