The Unitd Stat Court ofAppeal forthe Fith Cicut
and the United States District Court for the Westem Dustrict
of Texas haoentered a decision in conflict with a decision
by a stote court of lastresort and this Court's priorholdings
of judicial proceedings
as to call foran exercise of this
Courts
supervisorly power.

Can the ed otn
Filed federal habeas conpus (225 of Newly Discovered
Evidence wherein the newly chiscovered evidence proves that
the District Attomey's Office outright lied to have petitioner
convicted on thejuy's main question during deliberations,
wherein petitloner has proof by way of three police reports that
he did not attack Complainant with a Knife?

Moreover, pefit
Can a state high court compltely abrogate this Court's precedenruling under the Sufficiengy of the evidence (Jackson v. Virginia ) of 1979 and use ex post focto /retro-active law from 1965
Ihnson v.State 397 S.W. 20 424 )to uphold petifioner's.unlawful
conviction, wherein the Federal courts are Sondoning
theuse ofex
gast facto and retroactive cose law from lalb

Can the Federal courts
refuse to make the state high court
nswer the useof perjured (falseand misleading) teotimonk
wherein such offensive use los used to convictpe
Hioner and
New Change in Court Law of the Stote lowered the threshold of
Derilury in this precedential Case, Ex Darte Chavez (Tex Crln

Can the lower court courts indiscriminately deny (timely) filed Federal habeas corpus (2261) of newly discovered evidence wherein the newly discovered evidence proves that the District Attorney's Office outright lied to have petitioner convicted, on the jury's main quest during deliberations wherein petitioner has proof by way of the grand jury report that he did not attack complainant with a knife?