(1)
WHETHER THE GOVERNMENT'S UNAVAILING DEFENSE OF THE INDEFENSIBLE, WITH RESPECT
TO THE INDICTMENT, INADEQUATE JURY INSTRUCTIONS, AND THE CONSTRUCTIVE DENIAL OF
COUNSEL, WERE CLEARLY PREJUDICIAL TO DAVID LOPEZ, FOR WHICH BY ANY STANDARD OF
REVIEW, THE COURT SHOULD FIND DEFENDANT'S COUNSEL'S PERFORMANCE, HOPELESSLY
DEFICIENT, BORDERING ON CONSTRUCTIVE DENIAL OF COUNSEL-A STRUCTURAL ERROR.

(2)
WHETHER DAVID LOPEZ'S INVOCATION OF ACTUAL INNOCENCE, AND THE CAUSE AND EFFECT
DOCTRINE, ALLOWS THE SUPREME COURT TO ENTERTAIN ANY PROCEDURALLY CLAIMS NOT
RAISED ON DIRECT APPEAL

(3)
WHETHER BY REASON OF THE NUMEROUS CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATIONS COMMITTED BY THE
DISTRICT COURT, IT EFFECTIVELY LOST SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION AND THE POWERS
GRANTED IT BY CONGRESS UNDER 28 U.S.C. 3231 TO TRY DAVID LOPEZ.

Whether the government's defense, jury instructions, and denial of counsel were prejudicial to the defendant