Mr Davis was convicted with a penalcade 19.03(a)(7)(A) Aempted Lapital Murder. Mr. Davis was convicted on testimony evidence only of shooting two people and Mr. Davis was not convicted ofshooting at Them. Mr: Davis contends he did not Shoot Mr.Aoney And the Medical records will prove Mr. Boney inuy was not from being shot with agul Fifth circuit relied upon the state's couris statement of the Facts on direct Appeal but significantly misstated even that slanted ions.

A). Did the statwe change in Dct a4 2ol3 For Tex penalcode 16.01 1902) 19.03 al((A; because Second courtof Appeal's said in Mr. Davis insufficient evidence claim that the state was not requied to prove that mr. Davis had to shotot mr. Roney. But in April 1y aoz Mr. DAvis Statue indict ment and Of the crime of which Mr. DAvis is convicted of. 19.D3all) @l. Ifitdid change in @et 24, aol3 Was it retroavtive to mr. DaviS case.?

finding that Mr. Davis was not prejudiced by his trial counsels failure to request the Medicar reconds of oscar-Ronay basically counsel's falure to investiqate the Key evidence of Oscar-Boney-Goun-shotz wound ?

c) that Mr. Davis wasnot prejodiced by his tricl counsel's Falure to explain the remifications of taking a plea-deal?

Whether the state presented sufficient evidence to convict Mr. Davis of attempted capital murder