1) In adopting the 12th Court of Appeals opinion, who used the State's 'harm analysis'' standard, did the U . S . Dis t. Court apply the harmless- error review in an "objectively unreasonable" manner?

2) Can Gomez indictment be Constitutionally amended allowing the crime to be graded higher without i.the Grand Jury doing the broadening or amending?

3) If erroneously admitted evidence was not 'helpful* but in fact 'harmful' and prejudiced Gomez, was his Constitutional rights to due process and fair trial violated?

4) Was gomez ' trial fundamentally unfair due to prosecutorial misconduct during opening statement?

Whether the district court applied the harmless-error review in an 'objectively unreasonable' manner