I. WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN DENYING THE POST-CONVICTION CLAIM OF INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL WHERE THE RECORD ESTABLISHES THAT AN ORDER TO DISREGARD MICHAEL OVERS HEARSAY TESTIMONY ABOUT THE ALLEGED PROPERTIES OF OIL EATER, ERAN DEGLEASEE, WOULD NOT HAVE DEPRIVED THE EVIDENCE OF ITS PREJUDICIAL EFFECT, AND THAT IF APPELLATE COUNSEL HAD CHALLENGED THE TRIAL COURT'S FAILURE TO GRANT A MISTRIAL BASED ON THE ADMISSION OF THAT EVIDENCE AND TRIAL WOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED.

II. WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN CONCLUDING THAT THE WAIVER OF THE STATUTORY RIGHT TO POST CONVICTION CODES OR AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING WAS KNOWING WHERE THE RECORD INDICATES THAT PETITIONER WAIVED COUNSEL BECAUSE HE BELIEVED THAT DOING SO WOULD RETROACTIVELY RELIEVE HIM OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR PRIOR ACTIONS, INCLUDING WAIVER DECISIONS TAKEN.

III. WHETHER THE DEFENDANTS CONVICTION FOR MURDER SHOULD BE REVERSED, AND THIS CAUSE REMANDED FOR A NEW TRIAL, BECAUSE UNDER CRAWFORD V WASHINGTON, 541 U.S 36 (2004), THE STATE'S PRUSIVE EVIDENCE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ADMITTED, SINCE IT CONSISTED OF TESTIMONIAL HEARSAY STATEMENTS ALLEGEDLY MADE BY THE MURDER VICTIM, HIS LIE INDICATING SHE LEFT HIM.

Whether the lower court erred in dismissing petitioner's claims alleging violations of the First Amendment and the Equal Protection Clause