Did reasonable jurist debate whether Penal Code section 206 is Constitutionally void for purported vagueness because it is capable of arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement?

Did reasonable jurist debate whether the California court of Appeal reasonably reject Petitioner's sufficiency of evidence claim?

Does the declaration and witness statement secured after trial constitute new evidence within the meaning of Penal Code section 1473(b)(3)?

Did the Superior Court below error in concluding that Petitioner was not entitled to habeas corpus relief pursuant to Penal Code section 1473(b)(3)?

Did reasonable jurist debate whether California Penal Code section 206 is Constitutionally void for purported vagueness because it is capable of arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement?