Does Slock Burge # vs, united States^py u.s,^ CM33P DPPlt To my Cnss? Dou&is ieoPARoy

DOES BzRCWFXELD CSJ CONCuRRETfRuLlNOS reply To roy CASE? Birckfxelo is. month omo W, 136 USt M iy?7 (Sto£

Does Co Lem bnvs TKompso^so± us, 7^,7 23,730 QPPiy TO VyC-fiSE? PROCEDURAL DEFRUIT B(CeA7XDA7DtRCHFIELD VS./VORTH j Df>KbTR yS79 US, 03^ 976,

IsJi ny Cflse? 700HESERIOUS FlAST, LESSEROJC-IUDB Bmeo:To Yl OSS PRO VS, UtfmED S7V7£$ S39 US, £00 TO m Cldse 1, EXCEPTION FoR 22/effective ASSISTANCE OF Cloua/SEL:

Does ^rrtifezvs , u,s,i /aozao PPPF T0 toy CfiSE*

C0aJ R StateCourt PeFuse to Foliouj a unite 0 OTfiTES Supreme Court precedent 1?

Does Slack vs, wdaniel apply W WORSE?

Successive PeTitioaj "Subsequent PPPLicaT-Wa/ Oxo Defease Counsel violate itRickland 'S CumuTEE? fi)Does

Question not identified