Question one: Whether the federal district & circuit court and the
Florida State courts violated the Petitioner 's 6th & 14th Amendment rights —when
they failed to apply the plain language in Martinez v. Ryan . 566 U.S. 1, 132 S.Ct.
1309 (3/20/2012); Trevino v. Thaler . 569 U.S. ., 133 S.Ct. 1911 (5/28/2013), and
Edwards v. Carpenter. 529 U.S. 446, 120 S.Ct. 1587 (2000) to address the merits of
the Petitioner 's ineffective assistance of counsel claims and prosecutor & trial Court
issues for procedural default reasons which resulted in a miscarriage of justice?

Question two: Whether the Petitioner 's due process and sixth
amendment rights were violated when the trial counsel, appellate counsel and the
court failed to apply the standards for bias jury members found in Smith v. Phillins .
455 U.S. 209, 102 S.Ct. 940 (1982); Remmer v. U.S. . 350 U.S. 377, 76 S.Ct. 425
(1956); U.S. v. Wood . 299 U.S. 123 (1937)?

Question three: Whether the trial judge violated Petitioner 's constitutional
rights by enhancing the sentence beyond the signed scoresheet sentence (20 years,
App. 19) for all nine charges and by overstepping his authority by disallowing the
jury to be involved or to consider the recommended scoresheet causing Petitioner 's
right of trial by jury to be denied?

Question four: Whether the trial judge violated Petitioner 's rights when
he established a rule (R. 91, App. 98-99) that disallowed defense counsel from
inquiring the accusers on cross-exam in order to show one of the accusers was the
person committing the acts charged against the innocent Petitioner?

Question five: Whether the Petitioner 's rights were violated by the state
and federal courts by not rendering a complete decision on the merits of each claim?

Question six: Whether the State of Florida 's statutes governing sexual
battery can administer a capitol sentence of life with only a six person jury when a
murderer obtains the exact same sentence but with a twelve person jury, thus
violating the constitutional rights of the offender and rendering an illegal
conviction?

Question seven: Whether a conviction can be upheld with only the accusers
claiming an offense when others were present and testified they did not see any
offense and where there is no factual evidence existing beyond the allegation and
where there 's no eye witnesses, and no admittance by the petitioner thus resulting
in malicious prosecution, an miscarriage of justice?

Whether the federal district & circuit court and the Florida State courts violated the Petitioner's 6th-&-14th-Amendment-rights