DOES HUMPHRIES HAVE A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT GUARANTEED BY THE FIFTH, SIXTH, AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS TO A PROPERLY INSTRUCTED JURY DETERMINING THAT ALL ELEMENTS OF THE CHARGED CRIMES HAVE BEEN PROVEN BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT?

WAS HUMPHRIES ENTITLED TO A JURY INSTRUCTION PINPOINTING HIS THEORY OF DEFENSE AND WAS HE ENTITLED TO THE REQUESTED JURY INSTRUCTION CALCRIM NO. 571 VOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER IMPERFECT SELF-DEFENSE?

WHERE AN HONEST AND REASONABLE BELIEF IN THE NEED TO DEFEND IS A COMPLETE DEFENSE, DOES AN HONEST BUT UNREASONABLE BELIEF REDUCE THE HOMICIDE TO MANSLAUGHTER LAW?

DID THE TRIAL COURT COMMIT REVERSIBLE ERROR BY REFUSING HUMPHRIES REQUESTED INSTRUCTION ON IMPERFECT SELF-DEFENSE?

DID THE PROSECUTION PRESENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO SUSTAIN A PREMEDITATION AND DELIBERATE FIRST DEGREE MURDER CONVICTION?

DOES THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS HAVE INHERENT AUTHORITY TO DEEM HIS REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY AS A REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME?

Whether the petitioner was entitled to a jury instruction on his theory of defense and the requested jury instruction on voluntary manslaughter and imperfect self-defense