1. Do the decisions of the United States Supreme Court, rendered in the cases of Montgomery v. Louisiana, 577 U.S. , 136 S. Ct. 718 (2016), and Welch v. United States, 577 U.S. , 136 S. Ct. 1257 (2016), function to give retroactive effect to the change in state law effectuated by Byford v. State, 116 Nev. 215, 994 P. 2d 700 (2000).

2. Do the decisions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, rendered in the cases of Riley v. McDaniel, ("Riley I") 786 F. 3d 719 (9" Cir. (2015), and Riley v. Filson, 933 F. 3d 1068 (9™ Cir. 2019), function to give retroactive effect to the change in state law effectuated by Byford v. State, 116 Nev. 215, 994 P. 2d 700 (2000).

3. Do the decisions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which had denied the Petitioner's Application For Leave To File A Second or Successive Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, in Matylinsky v. Baca ( No. 19-71470); and other such Applications in the cases of Palovich v. Jo Gentry (No. 18-72065), Berry v. Williams (No. 18-70711), and Amati v. Williams (No. 18-72277), etc.; constitute a misapplication of federal law as determined by the United States Supreme Court in the cases of Montgomery v. Louisiana, 577 US. _ 1368S. Ct. 718 (2016), and Welch v. United States, 577 U.S. , 1368. Ct. 1257 (2016).

4. Is the Petitioner entitled to receive federal habeas corpus review of his claims for relief based upon the Nevada Supreme Court's decision in the case of Byford v. State, 116_Nev. 215, 994 P. 2d 700 (2000), in light of the decisions of the United States Supreme Court, rendered in the cases of Montgomery v. Louisiana, 577 U.S. , 136 S. Ct. 718 (2016), and Welch v. United States, 577 U.S. 136 S. Ct. 1257 (2016).

5. Is the Petitioner entitled to receive federal habeas corpus review of his claims for relief based upon the Nevada Supreme Court's decision in the case of Byford v. State, 116 Nev. 215, 994 P. 2d 700 (2000), in light of the decisions of the United States Court of Appeals, rendered in the cases of Riley v. McDaniel, ("Riley I") 786 F. 3d 719 (9" Cir. 2015)and Riley v. Filson, 933 F. 3d 1068 (9 Cir. 2019).

Whether the lower court erred in dismissing petitioner's claims for lack of standing and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted