QUESTION ONE: WHETHER THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN THE DENIAL
OF APPELLANTS MOTION TO VACATE THE JUNE 15, 2018, NOVEMBER 29,
2018, AND FEBRUARY 05, 2019 POST-CONVICTION ORDERS IN DISTRICT
COURT FILE NO. 27-CR-13-8979 AND TO OBTAIN THE AUDIO RECORDINGS
WITH TRANSCRIPTS OF THE 867 PRISON CALLS FOR APPELLANT TO
ADEQUATELY, EFFECTIVELY AND MEANINGFULLY PREPARE HIS
PRINCIPAL BRIEF DUE BY MARCH 16, 2020 IN A19-1129 APPEAL?

QUESTION TWO: WHETHER PETITIONER RECEIVED INEFFECTIVE
ASSISTANCE OF APPELLATE COUNSEL FOR FAILURE TO EFFECTIVELY
AND ADEQUATELY RAISE THE ISSUE ON WHETHER PETITIONER
RECEIVED INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF TRIAL COUNSEL FOR FAILURE
TO PROPERLY PRESERVE THE ISSUES IN:

A. WHETHER DISTRICT COURT ERRED IN ADMITTING
EVIDENCES THAT WERE IN VIOLATION OF APPELLANT 'S DUE
PROCESS CLAUSE UNDER THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT
AND DENIED APPELLANT 'S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO A
FAIR TRIAL?

B. WHETHER CUMULATIVE EFFECTS OF PROSECUTORIAL
MISCONDUCT DENIED APPELLANT 'S CONSTITUTIONAL AND
SUBSTANTIAL RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL IN VIOLATION OF THE
DUE PROCESS CLAUSE OF THE FIFTH AND FOURTEENTH
AMENDMENT, AND EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE OF THE
FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT?

AT TRIAL UNDER STRICKLAND V. WASHINGTON DURING APPELLANT 'S
DIRECT APPEAL IN LIGHT OF STRICKLAND V. WASHING TON, 466 U.S. 668,
690 (1984); BRADY V. MARYLAND, 373 U.S. 83 (1963); MOONEY V. HOLOHAN,
294 U.S. 103 (1935); PYLE V. KANSAS, 317 U.S. 213 (1942); NAPUE V. ILLINOIS,
360 U.S. 264 (1959); GIGLIO V. UNITED STATES, 405 U.S. 150 (1972)?

QUESTION THREE: WHETHER PETITIONER IS ENTITLED TO AN
ACQUITTAL OR NEW TRIAL ON THE NEWLY DISCOVERED EXONERATING
EVIDENCE SHOWING ACTUAL INNOCENCE BASED ON RECANTATIONS OF
KEY MATERIAL WITNESSES ' TESTIMONY IN LIGHT OF LARRISON V. UNITED
STATES, 24 F. 2D 82 (7th CIR. 1928) AND HERRERA V. COLLINS, 506 U.S. 390 (1993)?

Whether the lower court erred in denying appellant's motion