WHETHER, TO NEW YORK C.P.L 440.10(2)(C) STATUTES BEING AMENDED PURSUANT RULE 60(b)(5)(6) RECONSIDERATION IS WARRANTED AS TO THE LOWER COURT ERROR IN DENYING THE MOTION TO SUPPRESS ALL OF PETITIONER 'S STATEMENT, WHICH WERE INVOLUNTARY RENDERED AND VIOLATED HIS FIFTH AMENDMENT PRIVILEGE AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION.

WHETHER, THE REPRESENTATION TRIAL AND APPELLATE WAS INEFFECTIVE FOR FAILING TO ARGUE THE PROPER LEGAL AUTHORITY AT THE SUPPRESSION HEARING, WHICH RESULTED IN HIGHLY INCRIMINATING EVIDENCE BEING ADMITTED IN PETITIONER JURY TRIAL IN VIOLATION OF PETITIONER FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS

WHETHER THE DISTRICT COURT ABUSED ITS DISCRETION WHEN IT DENIED THE PETITIONER 'S RULE 60(B) MOTION. A CHANGE IN NEW YORK STATE STATUE C.P.L 440.10(2)(C) WHICH THE DISTRICT COURT INVOKE DURING PETITIONER HABEAS PETITION, PROCEDURAL BARRING THE ISSUE WHETHER PETITIONER CONFESSION : SHOULD HAVE BEEN DISMISSED AS A RESULT OF HIM INVOKING HIS RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT

WHETHER DISTRICT COURT ABUSED HIS DISCRETION UPON THE "EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING TO GRANT PETITIONER RELIEF ON THE GROUNDS RAISED IN HIS THIRD RULE 60(B) MOTION PURSUANT TO THE TEST ISSUED IN SARGENT V COLUMBIA FOREST PRODUCTS, INC 75 F;.3D 86 (2D CIR 1996),

whether-new-york-cpl-440.10(2)(c)-statutes-being-amended