Whether, due to the overwhelingly objective indicis of national consensus that surrounds the advaned research on adblescent brain developmont wholly disproving the presumption that juveniles who commit crimes think like adults and cannot be rehabilitated, it can still be held as Constitutional under the 8t Amendment for a Family Court to waive it's jurisdiction over a 14 yer old adolescent for the sole purpose of exposing the 14 year old to oault penalties?

N.J.S.A.2A:4A-26e.l.C.(i) which now prdhibits the Family Court from wiving it's jurisdiction over any joveniles under the onstitution, must be applied retroactively to cases on collateral eview?

Whether New Jersey's revised juvenile waiver statute (N.J.S.A. 2A:4A-26.1(c)) which prohibits the Family Court from waiving its jurisdiction over any juveniles under the age of 15 announced a new substantive rule that must be applied retroactively to cases on collateral review