I. UkdrKw ^iako^aCcartoftrUUal Appeals useof a mud W-rdr 0CLCik^
kfiUnus -Sub^ecf^affar jafisdhftoa dal mis UvalfJ
&£ d-A Lx tost Facto Mklatka
© P ike, Coa$titati o a .rneatCinfl of 4rt / r5ea. /o

S-. uik^ker Oiclakoina. Ccu/t of tri
Med lo ff v\ ufswl t
sak^ect matfef dal* is a.
£U<-t.$ louvs of IWiefi Siatej to
&rvd tUitel S+at« Sap^v^toart.«m?aaf Appeals use,oP Stofe <,x rd m 9,31 bffc aoai gkc* a/ h ^ 0c&

3j -tenets
rwi*4|tWf Conflict? oOitli
^ci of Aflp«ak C/^f

Whether the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals' use of a new non-retroactivity doctrine to deny Petitioner's subject-matter jurisdiction claim is valid as an Ex post Facto law