1. Did Terrell make a substantial preliminary showing that the omissions made by Affiant from his warrant affidavit were recklessness by the proof of omissions itself?

2. Did Terrell make a substantial preliminary showing that false statements knowingly and intentionally, or with reckless disregard for the truth was included by Affiant in his warrant affidavit?

3. Did a Neutral and Detached Magistrate approve Terrell's probable cause affidavit?

4. Did the state provide Terrell with a Full and Fair Franks Evidentiary Hearing in accordance with Due Process?

5. Was Terrell's 4th Amendment claims meritorious?

6. Was defense counsel's combination of Terrell's 4th Amendment claims at the suppression hearing litigated competently? If so, was Terrell prejudiced by defense counsel's incompetence?

7. Was defense counsel's failure to impeach Affiant with his warrant affidavit deficient performance? If so, was Terrell prejudiced by defense counsel's incompetence?

8. Was defense counsel's failure to investigate Terrell's case deficient performance? If so, was Terrell prejudiced by defense counsel's incompetence?

9. Was the deliberate/negligent concealment by the state of the third officer whose testimony, when evaluated in the context of the entire record, violate Terrell's Due Process?

10. Did Terrell demonstrate a colorable need for the third officer to testify to events that he had personally observed, and whose testimony would have been relevant and material to the defense? If so, was Terrell prejudiced by the state's failure to compulsory process of this witness?

11. Did the State knowingly and intentionally use false testimony? Was the false testimony material?

12. Was Terrell's appellate counsel's performance deficient? If so, was Terrell prejudiced by their incompetence?

Did Terrell make a substantial preliminary showing that the omissions made by Affiant from his warrant affidavit were recklessness by the proof of omissions itself?