I. DID THE FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL CREATE A MANIFEST
INJUSTICE WHEN IT EXPRESSLY AND DIRECTLY RULED IN
CONFLICT WITH DECISIONS OF FELLOW DISTRICT COURT OF
APPEAL'S ON THE SAME QUESTION OF LAW, VIOLATING THE
PETITIONER'S FIFTH, EIGHTH AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT
RIGHTS?

II. DID TRIAL COURT CREATE A MANIFEST INJUSTICE BY ABUSING
ITS DISCRETION IN FAILING TO APPOINT CONFLICT FREE
COUNSEL PRIOR TO SENTENCING AND BY DISMISSING THE
PETITIONER'S MOTION TO WITHDRAW HER PLEA WITHOUT A
HEARING, VIOLATING THE PETITIONER'S SIXTH, EIGHTH AND
FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS?

III. DID COUNSEL'S INEFFECTIVE PERFORMANCE PREJUDICE THE
PETITIONER BY LEADING HER TO BELIEVE SHE WOULD NOT
RECEIVE A SENTENCE OVER FIVE (5) YEARS; BY FAILING TO
ARGUE THE COMBINED TIME SERVED IN RELATION TO THE NEW
SENTENCE WOULD EXCEED STATUTORY MAXIMUM; AND BY FAILING
TO ARGUE TRIAL COURT LACKED AUTHORITY TO RE-SENTENCE;
THUS, VIOLATING THE PETITIONER'S FIFTH, SIXTH, EIGHTH,
AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS?

Did the first district court of appeal create a manifest injustice by ruling in conflict with other district courts on the same legal question, violating the petitioner's constitutional rights?