QUESTION # ONE: Whether the District Court abused it's discretion by failing to conduct an evidentiary hearing by relying upon the unsworn statements of trial lawyer Myers in which do not constitute evidence, thus the lower court's denial conflicts with U.S. Supreme Court precedents in INS v. Phinpathya, 464 U.S. at 188 n. 6 (1984); and Blackledge v. Allison, 431 U.S. at 80-83 (1977) ?

QUESTION # TWO: Whether the district court violated Rose v. Lundy, 455 U.S. 509, 520 (1982), by failing to address and issue a findings of fact and conclusion of law as to Petitioner's appellate ineffectiveness claim that Attorney Scheetz failed to raise a dead-bang winner on his direct appeal proceedings in which would have resulted in reversal of his sentence on appeal ?

QUESTION # THREE: Whether Petitioner Thomas's ex-trial counsel Attorney Meyer. failure to correct testimony which he knew was false or misleading constitutes ineffective assistance of counsel in violation of his Sixth Amendment Rights of the U.S. Constitution?

QUESTION # FOUR: Whether. Petitioner Thomas, received ineffective assistance of counsel by Attorney Meyer failing to conduct an adequate background inestigation, thus did Mr. Thomas's ex-trial counsel conduct his defense in a totally incompetent manner and that such incompetence prejudiced his defense in violation of his Sixth Amendment Rights of the U.S. Constitution ?

QUESTION # FIVE: Whether the U .S. Supreme Court should recognize an argument not raised before the district court as itis critical issue affecting Thomas's substantial rights. Did Petitioner Thomas's ex-trial counsel operate pursuant to a conflict interest when, during the course of the representation, Attorney Meyer'is representation, counsel's and Petitioner's interests 'diverge with respect to a material course of action,' thus his ex-trial counsel's continued representation of Thomas violate his Sixth Amendment Rights of the U.S. Constitution ?

QUESTION SIX: Whether the U.S. Supreme Court should recognize an argument raised for the first time with the Eighth Circuit Court of appeals as it is a critical issue affecting Thomas's substantial rights. Did Petitioner Thomas's ex-trial counsel provide him with ineffective assistance of counsel because Attorney Meyer did not fully advise him of a favorable plea offer; and the risks of going to trial versus pleading guilty, thus violating his Sixth Amendment Rights during plea-negotiations stage of trial in the case herein ?

Whether the District Court abused its discretion by failing to conduct an evidentiary hearing