Whether Arizona v. Youngblood, 488 U.S. 1 (1988), is sufficient to except such due process claim from procedural default of RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF JUDGEMENTS §28?

2. Whether the spoliation of evidence by forensic analyst in bad faith has significance under the controlling standard for establishing due process violation for a destruction of evidence of unknown value by police in bad faith?

3. Whether newly discovered evidence doubly establishing the State's forensic analyst violated my due process rights under Napue v. People of State of Ill., 3600 U.S. 204 (1959) & Fed. Rule(s) of Evidence 701 & 702 is sufficient to except such due process claim from res judicata (and/or procedural default) pursuant to the Law of RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF JUDGEMENTS §28?

4. Whether there exists Extraordinary circumstances to except a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, whether at trial or direct appeal from res judicata or procedural default, pursuant to the Law of RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF JUDGEMENTS §28?

5. In the conviction of one who is actually innocent [Ct. at 2649], where applying an analysis under Brecht v. Abrahamson, 507 U.S. 619, 113 S.Ct. 1710 to the relevant facts, the defect occurring in the proceeding had a substantial & injurious effect or influence in determining jury's verdict?

Whether newly discovered evidence is sufficient to establish a due process violation for procedural default or the bar of res judicata pursuant to the Restatement (Second) of Judgments