1. WHAT CONSTITUTES SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO OVERCOME THE PRESUMPTION CREATED
BY THE CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE SECTION 198.5, WHERE THE STATE COURT'S DECISION
IS BASED ON AN UNREASONABLE DETERMINATION OF FACT, AND LAW, IN LIGHT OF THE
EVIDENCE PRESENTED IN THE STATE COURT PROCEEDINGS? (28 USC §2254(3)(2)).

2. WHETHER PRELIMINARY HEARING TESTIMONY UNDERLYING AN INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE
OF COUNSEL CLAIM (28 USC 2254(d)(1)) - [WITHHELD FROM THE JURY BY TRIAL COUNSEL] QUALIFY AS "NEW" EVIDENCE FOR THE PURPOSE OF INVOKING THE SCHLUP ACTUALINNOCENCE/MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE EXCEPTION TO THE STATE PROCEDURAL DEFAULTS
AND EXCEPTION TO THE AEDPA'S STATUTE OF LIMITATION; SPECIFICALLY WHERE THE
WITHHELD TESTIMONY EVIDENCE IS THE LINCHPIN - [EVIDENCE OF THE UNLAWFUL ENTRY
INTO THE RESIDENCE] - THAT SETS IN MOTION THE WHOLE MACHINERY OF CALIFORNIA
PENAL CODE SECTION 198.5?

what-constitutes-sufficient-evidence-to-overcome-the-presumption