First Question : Did Montgomery v. Louisiana also announce a new watershed rule of criminal procedure that applies retroactively when ruling the Supremacy Clause applies to state post-conviction/collateral review as defined by 28 U.S.C. $ 2244(d)(1)(C) ?

Second Question : Does Montgomery v. Louisiana 's application of the Supremacy Clause bind Trevino v. Thaler retroactively to state post-conviction/collateral review as defined by 28 U.S.C. $ 2244(d)(1)(C) ?

Third Question : Does Montgomery v. Louisiana 's application of the Supremacy Clause along with Trevino v. Thaler 's procedural ruling announce a new retroactive right to post-conviction discovery procedures as defined by 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(l)(B)&(C) ?

Fourth Question : Does a violation of Brady v. Maryland in the absence of state post conviction discovery procedures constitute an "impediment " as defined by 28 U.S.C. $ 2244(d)(1)(B)?

Fifth Question : Can the discovery procedures of Rule 6 of the Rules Governing 2254 Cases be invoked to remove an impediment as defined by 28 U.S.C. $ 2244(d)(1)(B) when the state courts allow no post-conviction discovery procedures to vindicate a Brady violation?

Sixth Question : Does Montgomery v. Louisiana 's application of the Supremacy Clause bind a retroactive application of Crawford v. Washington under 28 U.S.C. $ 2244(d)!1)(B&(C) to allow impeachment of a co-defendant 's statements relative to withheld Brady material?

Seventh Question : Does the equitable tolling/actual innocence gateway defined in McQuiggin v. Perkins apply to a lesser homicide offense when unjustly convicted of a greater homicide offense?

Did Montgomery v. Louisiana announce a new watershed rule of criminal procedure that applies retroactively when ruling the Supremacy Clause applies to state review as defined by 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)(C)?