Whether the Court's adjudication of this case ensue from a decision that was to, or involve an unreasonable application of, clearly established law as recognized by the United States Supreme Court under Schulp v. Delo?1.

Whether the Court has deviated materially from established jurisprudence by allowing prosecutor's to withhold evidence from the petitioner that was favorable to the proving of his innocence and further use it against him in order to ensue a conviction?2.

Whether the Constitutional requirement of due process is satisfied where a conviction is obtained on the sole basis of a witness' testimony that was admitted by this witness to be presented under false pretense?3.

Whether the Appellate Court acutely determine that the circumstantial evidence used against this petitioner was sufficiently reasonable in its application?4.

Whether the Court's affirming of petitioner's conviction violate his due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution and the Eight Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment?5.

Whether the Court's adjudication of this case ensue from a decision that was to, or involve an unreasonable application of, clearly established law as recognized by the United States Supreme Court under Schulp v. Delo?