1) WHETHER THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT RENDERED A DECISION IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW OF THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT AS PRONOUNCED IN BRADY V. MARYLAND, 373 U.S. 83, 2.7 (1963), LEVIES V. WHITFIELD, 514 U.S. 114, 437 (1995) PENNSYLVANIA V. RITCHESON U.S. S.CT. 2001 (2009) (PLURALITY OPINION) WHEN IT DENIED PETITIONER'S CLAIM THAT A PROSECUTOR IS SUPPRESSING EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE PETITIONER'S CHIROPRACTICE RESULTS IN POSSESSION OF THE POLICE?

2) WHETHER THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT ERRED IN DENYING PETITIONER'S CLAIM THAT A VIOLATION OF THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT AS PRONOUNCED IN WILLIAMS V. TAYLOR, 524 U.S. 420, 430, 434 (2000) WHEREIN IF DENIED PETITIONER'S REQUEST FOR AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING UNDER THE PROSECUTORS SUPPRESSION OF EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE?

Whether the California Supreme Court rendered a decision in conflict with the law of the United States Supreme Court announced in Brady-v-Maryland,Kyles-v-Whitley,Pennsylvania-v-Richie