xnHbthet l PeTiTfotjGk Bol^btt S CoHsjimTONAL PH&hts \siezjg v/W)7£-o /3y
THE tHiHteeht H Judicial b<37&CT Cjduat orN&n./Dexivd und&l the
Dub Process Clause of the Fcufteemt H Am&LDrrirDT f [J?e& APPbddH 4}

PfZOSEdurU/L \N/'THHBUi_EXCuLP^TVf^
?9T)TibhU3L (baujGTT '3 TRIAL tn \lioiArhM
Dib ms Constitute A BPAOcj MPoiAribA DEHjitiE-
TTte Dub Process Clause of tHg Povateehta /biyBMomBMT 7 [see AfP, /p\

\NHetHeT TfiB ArrftTE PPaSE£uTDfZ/S HjTE(lFEfc(=jLCE XM/rH DEFENSE TEPha's
expert \nTtaesSj Da, loot RY\frRTiHEL f Constitutes Ptusse Cuctortal mi.5-
Couduct , /aj diGlavdh or PBnrtoNEfi's fy'&Hr to. a fatyl t&al udd bathe
CDmCuisof^ Process Clause of. tHe Sixth Aw^wmvgwt ?

^HrETAEfl THE STATE VlSTfUCT <JUP6E PmslDhi G- OMBTZ- Peat ToUEA. '
OoujETT's state . Ap&gas Proceeding - fihuSeo His Huviotirij or DlscjiEn'biH
&(j &EFusm& to Recuse Himself For 600 d Cause . [Joee ftfPENDht A
ftrpGTHD/)( /TPPEhJ}?* (L AkIO FGcbteo #7 1 .EXibEbNCE At \nAetHer. the State
cF the Rules of DiS&on^kj
Disclosure unpejlAmo

\N HctHeRL TAG TPM l El \MAS DEpfmcO Of EV iUbhCG RjE&AEbMCr
dEf&TbftHT'S /HAbiLinj To FbfLn\ SPecTFiE fUlETTj S_CfEN77Ftc IFXjihGNCE A/
PpLofZ Of THe SelF-D gFghsg GuA/m^ AnD PTsPEA. Jlaitj ThstAuct T'dds BASED
m HU-BTibGMCG. RglMeo 7b THE SHooVHE j iNCLubmO- vrcnWS HtSTDfZ-uj

Whether petitioner Boyett's constitutional rights were violated by the Thirteenth Judicial District Court of New Mexico under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?