I
Were the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments violated when
a juror admitted viewing unadmitted evidence during deliberations and stated that her verdict was prejudiced
thereby?

II
Did the District Court err by denying petitioner's juror
misconduct claim on the merits even though the state
never refuted the presumption of prejudice and without
an evidentiary hearing as requested by petitioner in
both state and federal courts?

III
Were petitioner's Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights
to effective assistance of trial counsel and due process
violated where trial counsel failed to investigate and
raise an alibi defense despite readily available strong
evidence in the record?

IV
Were petitioner's rights to the effective assistance of
appellate counsel and to due process under the Sixth
and Fourteenth Amendments violated when appellate
counsel refused to file a habeus corpus petition with
the direct appeal and when appellate counsel stated that
to do so would jeopardize the appeal as the petition
was unsupported, where the District Court ultimately
concluded the evidence did support petitioner's claims
contained in his petition for writyof habeas corpus?

V
Did the District Court deny petitioner's Fourteenth
Amendment right to due process when it imbued the petitioner, a layman with no prior legal training,
background or exposure to the legal system, with legal
insight of such sufficiency as to realize that his
appellate counsel's instructions were erroneous and
to disobey appellate counsel's orders not to file a
habeas petition during the appeal but to wait until
post-appeal, with the result petitioner's grounds
2 through 6 were procedurally barred undet 28 U.S.C.
2244(d)(1)(D) for lack of diligence because petitioner
did not file a habeas petition in pro se during the
appeal so as to create an exception to the procedural
bar rule of Coleman v Thompson , 501 US 722 (1991)?

VI
Were the petitioner's Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights
to a fair trial and due process violated where the prosecu
tion suppressed and withheld evidence of an irrefutable alibi defense which placed petitioner out of the area, state
and country at the times the alleged crimes allegedly
occurred, and secondly suppressed and withheld strong
impeachment evidence of the star witnesses' plot to frame
the petitioner?

VII
Was the petitioner's right to due process under the
Fourteenth Amendment abrogated where both the Ninth Circuit
and District Courts denied a Certificate of Appealability
using the wrong legal standard or misapplying the correct
one via narrow interpretation?

VIII
Where a state habeas petition is denied as untimely by the
Federal District Court under 28 U.S.C. 2244(d)(2) although filed within the one-year AEDPA deadline, does the
Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause mandate that a
habeas petitioner be accorded the right to challenge such a
denial under the rule that the presumption of correctness
may be rebutted by clear and convincing evidence?

Were the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments violated when a juror admitted viewing unadmitted evidence during deliberations and stated that her verdict was prejudiced thereby?