1.) WHEATHER PETITIONER WAS DENIED HIS SIXTH AMENDMENT CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO THE EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF APPELLATE COUSEL FAILURE TO RAISE THE VALID AND MERIT ORIOUS CLAIM THAT THE PETITIONER WAS CONVICTED OF THE CRIME WHEN THERE WAS A REASONABLE DOUBT OF HIS GUILT.

2.) WHETHER PETITIONER WAS DENIED HIS FOURTEENTH AND SIXTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS TO THE DUE PROCESS OF LAW, AND THE EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COULSEL WHEN THE STATE CONVICTED HIM OF THE OFFENSE OF BURGLARY WHILE FAILING TO PROVE THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF THE OFFENSE, AND COUNSELS FAILURE TO POINT OUT THIS CLAIMS MERITS IN A POST_TRIAL MOTION, AND ON HIS DIRECT APPEAL.

Whether petitioner was denied his Sixth Amendment constitutional right to the effective assistance of appellate counsel