Whether the New York Court of Appeals precedential case, on confrontation violation claims, is contrary to clearly established federal law, as established by this Court, rendering, as it follows, the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division: Second Department's determination, in denying Petitioner's application for a writ of error coram nobis, that he was not deprived of his right to confrontation, as guaranteed under the Confrontation Clause, provided by the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution, contrary to clearly established federal law, as established by this Court, and or unreasonable in light of the facts presented. And;

Whether the New York Court of Appeals precedential case, on ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claims, is contrary to clearly established federal law, as established by this Court, for not adopting a "comparison" element when such claims are under review, rendering, as it follows, the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division: Second Department's determination, in denying Petitioner's application for a writ of error coram nobis, that he was not deprived of his right to the effective assistance of appellate counsel, as guaranteed under the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution, contrary to clearly established federal law, as established by this Court, and or unreasonable in light of the facts presented.

Whether the New York Court of Appeals precedential case, on confrontation violation claims, is contrary to clearly established federal law