1. Does a State appellate court violate a criminal defendant's right to due process on appeal under the Fourteenth Amendment—by denying the defendant meaningful review of the merits of his case and effectively rendering his appeal meaningless—when it revises procedural historical facts contrary to the record, evidence, and circuit court's and parties' understanding with no notice or opportunity for the circuit court or parties to be heard on the issue?

2. To sustain a criminal conviction consistent with the due process guaranteed under the Fourteenth Amendment, must a prior inconsistent statement, recanted by the declarant at trial and utilized against a defendant as substantive evidence at a state trial be corroborated by reliable, independent evidence substantiating each element of the crime charged?

Whether a state appellate court's revision of procedural historical facts contrary to the record, evidence, and understanding of the court and parties below, with no notice or opportunity for them to be heard, violates a criminal defendant's right to due process