I. Petitioner Shane Roscce's conviction rested upon and. was upheld by the State
Appellate and Federal Habeas Courts based on the testimonial hearsay statements
of the decedent given through police and admitted through an Improper
determination of forfeiture by wrongdoing that violated Mr. Roscce's
confrontation right/ together with the dubious and .impugned testimony of
Kimberly Roseoe, the Petitioner's ex-wife, who's credibility was a large factor
in the jury's determining the verdict.
The First Question Presented is:
Whether the.,Fourteenth Amendment .guarantee of, Due Process is violated when
the prosecution withholds impeaching evidence that shows a key witness who's
statement was used In part as the primary evidence against the Petitioner was
lying.
Because Petitioner Shane Roseoe's.. conviction rests upon the improperly
admitted testimonial statements that violated Mr. Roseoe's confrontation rights
were used as the primary evidence at trial.

II.
The Second Question Presented is:
Did th@ only.evidence presented as direct evidence to Implicate Petitioner's
involvement in the crime have a substantial and injurious effect "or " influence
in determining the jury's verdict under a full and complete Brecht Harmless
Error analysis.

III. Because Petitioner's conviction rests on the .primary evidence that in part
consists of the testimonial hearsay statements . admitted under the state
forfeiture by wrongdoing rule were admitted In violation of Petitioner's right
to confrontation.

The Third Question Presented is:
Whether the Sixth Amendment Guarantee to effective assistance of counsel is
violated where defense counsel fails, to object under confrontation grounds and
does that failure prejudice the Petitioner.

IV.
The Fourth Question Presented is:
■ Whether the Fourteenth Amendment .Guarantee of- Due Process is violated where
a judge determines that a. defendant is . guilty of murdering a witness before
trial on that very, charge without any evidence'-'-being, presented, without
presiding over any of the prior proceedings and without . being privy to any
evidence or information in any . prior judicial proceedings mostly . because it Is
self evident to the judge?

V. Petitioner was represented -by counsel who-was'married to the very prosecutor
who initiated the charge against the Petitioner, and was an. active participant of
the,prosecution 's team.

The Fifth and Final Question Presented is:
-Whether the Sixth Amendment Guarantee..to,conflict fret counsel is.violated
where counsel fails, to inform her .client -of „an actual conflict,..of interest in
her. marriage -to the very prosecutor, who., authorized charges-and an active, member
of ...the prosecution's team.

Whether the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee of due process is violated when the prosecution withholds impeaching evidence