1. Whether the Fed. R as a matter of course' Responsive pleading is filed can be arbitrarily disregarded and denied?Cxim. P. 15(a) Motion 's right to amend a 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 before a•

2. Whether the district court erred when it refused to grant an evidentiary hearing, even though Petitioner made a substantial preliminary showing that the affiants knowingly and intentionally included false statements in their affidavits in violation of the Fourth Amendment?

3. Whether Fair Notice was violated when evidence of the overt act/substantial step presented to the grand jury and charged in the indictment ("by hiring a person to kill") was not met at trial and a different theory of guilt was presented to convict and sustain conviction?

4. Whether Fair Notice was violated when the government charged a defendant for violating a statute, based on the case agent's testimony to the grand jury that the government "recorded" defendant's use of the phone, then added a "or caused to to be used" phrase to the statute at trial to obtain conviction due to another party's use of the phone?

5. Whether structural error occiffred when the gd>verrrmentT used evidence, a letter, in the murder-for-hire offense as a confession towards the kidnapping offense after it explicitly told the district court (months before trial) it would not do so at trial?

6. Whether a statute punishing the use of an instrumentality of interstate commerce, a cellular phone, during the commission of a crime requires the government to prove the interstate capabilities of the cellular phone?

Whether the Fed. R.. Crim. P. 15(a) Motion's right to amend as a-matter of course' a 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 before a Responsive pleading is filed can be arbitrarily disregarded and denied?