I.
Did the State fail to prove the corpus delicti of charges alleging
penetration and sexual conduct with Jose Arroyo's mouth where the only
proof of those acts was Arroyo's own statement?

II.
After reviewing discovery, Arroyo's appointed counsel moved for an
independent expert analysis of the State's DNA evidence. The State, citing
the high costs of an independent DNA analysis, moved to remove outside
counsel, and the court appointed a public defender. Where the public
defender then refused to obtain an independent DNA analysis, did he
prejudice Arroyo, justifying the re-appointment of outside counsel?

III.
Did the circuit court fail to conduct a proper Krankel hearing when
Arroyo raised several allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel in his pro
se post-trial motion?

Did the State fail to prove the corpus delicti of charges alleging penetration and sexual conduct with Jose Arroyo's mouth where the only proof of those acts was Arroyo's own statement?