#1. Is it proper for the prosecution to withhold the fact that a deal has been made with the witness for their testimony against a defendant.

#2. Why wasn't relief granted to Petitioner after the DNA results were released by the OSBI?

#3. Was it a denial of due process and a denial of fundamental right to prove actual innocence when Judicial Order was ignored that would have provided further evidence that Petitioner is in fact actually innocent of any crime claimed by the State.

#4. Would it be considered ineffective assistance of counsel that Petitioner's Appellate Counsel failed to file a Motion To Compel the State to have the co-defendants tested? Compelling the State to follow the order issued by the original Judge who ordered DNA Testing.

#5. Was it error for the Oklahoma Court of Appeals to not follow, or enforce the law under the 2013 Post-Conviction DNA Act?

#6. Petitioner's trial counsel Wayne M. Foumerat has been disbarred from the practice of law in the state of Oklahoma. Due to it was clear (according to Judge Twyla Gray) that Foumerat did not know the law. Petitioner went on trial four weeks before Glossip. How could he know the law in Petitioner's case and not know the law in Glossip?

Is it proper for the prosecution to withhold the fact that a deal has been made with the witness for their testimony against a defendant