1. Whether being pro se versus being represented by counsel at the state initial collateral proceeding is a determinative factor for obtaining withdrawal from a federal habeas court when a prisoner seeks to excuse a procedural default and demonstrate that the defaulted state claim is substantive under Antiterrorism?

2. Whether Petitioner's rights to the assistance of counsel (to the protection of the right itself in conjunction with the right to be tried only for the offense charged) were violated by the prosecutor's improper and excessive questioning about petitioner's unrelated charges that were pending at the time of the trial below and counsel for those pending charges was not present?

Whether being presented by counsel at the state initial-collateral proceedings is a determinative factor for obtaining an evidentiary hearing before a federal habeas court when a prisoner seeks to excuse a procedural default and demonstrate that the defaulted state claim is substantial under Martinez