(a) Whether the trial court was legally convened and constitu
ted with the provisions of the constitution and statute to remain
a "Court of Competent Jurisdiction" after Petitioner was abando
ned by his retained trial counsel at the most critical stage of
his jury trial? And,
(b) Whether a plea agreement for probation rendered by such
court, while Petitioner was without the assistance of his retained
trial counsel, is a valid judgment of conviction?

(a) Whether the trial court violated Petitioner's Constitutio
nal Sixth Amendment right when the trial judge permitted the de-
[or] removed Petitioner's retained trial counsel-of- parture of,
choice at midtrial? And,
(b) Whether the trial court violated Petitioner's Constitutio
nal Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights to a Fair -Trial and Due
Process of Law by proceeding with the criminal prosecution after
Petitioner was abandoned by his retained trial counsel, and was
without the assistance of authorized counsel?

Whether the trial court violated Petitioner's 5th, 6th, and
14th Amendment Constitutional rights to have his trial completed
by the particular jury first selected, when the trial judge with
out reviewing an alternative course of action, without manifest
necessity or even declaring a mistrial, dismissed the deadlocked
jury after jeopardy had attached (expending less than an hour
deliberating) and put Petitioner twice to jeopardy by imposing
and sentencing him under the same indictment to an [unauthorized]
probation, while Petitioner was without the assistance of his
retained trial counsel?

(a) Whether the Habeas Court violated Petitioner's Due Process
and Equal Protection under the Law Constitutional Rights, when
the Habeas Court disregarded the Actual Bias and Conflict of Inte
rest, (reflected on the face of the record) and allowed current
District Attorney Sharen Wilson, (former trial judge) to make and
filed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in Habeas Proceed
ings, and represent the State as the Chief Defense Attorney; in
the very same case where she also presided as the trial judge?
(b) Whether the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law made,
drafted, and filed by Sharen Wilson's office are void from incep
tion?

Whether the trial court was legally convened and constituted with the provisions of the constitution and statute to remain a 'Court of Competent Jurisdiction' after Petitioner was abandoned by his retained trial counsel at the most critical stage of his jury trial?