(1) Were Counsel was Ineffective when Failed to Present to the Court During Suppression Hearing than the Petitioner Teks Mamanba Nataeig Watngr when Invoking has Feeth Ama Iment Zagut to Zeman Ssicnt?

(2) Wetere Counsel wis Ingreecting when Failuog to Call Me- and Mrs. Graven Srerd as a Viable bete nks Wes ne<ses) al Suppee< of Wietro) =) Lemiine Ab an Oppusit Lon ~D Preamedizkted Mur pEeR Durave eas'

(3) Whethez Counsel was Hefecaive when Fatling to Demand Phystchl Evedenle De Pedr of Phone Lecoeas Flom the State, Used Durang Pas-Teszal ano Aaa © to Bst Agta a Tevolaije and deen -70 comma Wucpel, Instead | Stzpulat Eng to the Puns Vecorp Ink Tagatiod).

Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to present to the court during suppression hearing evidence that the petitioner seeks to raise when invoking his 5th Amendment right to remain silent