1.) WHETHER DEFENDANT-APPELLANT WAS DENIED HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO BE PRESENT AT ALL CRITICAL STAGES OF TRIAL WHERE HE WAS INTENTIONALLY NOT SUMMONED BY THE TRIAL JUDGE TO APPEAR IN COURT IN PERSON?

2.) WHETHER THE STATE COURT ERRED IN CONCLUDING THAT DEFENDANT-APPELLANT WAS COMPETENT TO STAND TRIAL WHERE THE DOCTOR CONDUCTING THE TESTING ADMITTEDLY FAILED TO CONDUCT COMPLETE TESTING OF DEFENDANT-APPELLANT?

3.) WHETHER THE STATE COURT'S ADJUDICATION OF DEFENDANT-APPELLANT'S CLAIMS VIOLATED PRECEDENCE SET BY THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT WHERE a) AN ACCUSED HAS THE RIGHT TO BE PRESENT AT ALL CRITICAL STAGES OF THE TRIAL WHERE HIS ABSENCE MIGHT FRUSTRATE THE FAIRNESS OF THE PROCEEDINGS, b) WHERE THE TRIAL STATED THAT TESTING WAS NECESSARY UPON THE SHOWING IN THIS CASE THAT DEFENDANT MAY BE INCOMPETENT, THUS ESTABLISHING THAT THE COURT HAD A BONA FIDE DOUBT AS TO DEFENDANT-APPELLANT'S AND c) WHERE THE STATE COURT FAILED TO OBSERVE COMPETENCY TO STAND TRIAL, PROCEDURES ADEQUATE TO PROTECT DEFENDANT-APPELLANT'S RIGHT NOT TO BE TRIED OR CONVICTED WHILE INCOMPETENT TO STAND TRIAL?

Whether defendant-appellant was denied his constitutional right to be present at all critical stages of trial