I. Wid the S.C. Supreme Court ettor by barches Rebitiowers.Fedecsl Fachsaal ip dicate Hoa. his purported uiaivecof bis 6" Rmendonent Righ-bo—fective assistance of Causal was Gomstitutionoslly imtlem.

II. phe $6, Spann Cat na by baa ities bal ful Ip edicate that be was dewled. effective assistowce of Counsel at a is peste enabia Aden

III. Di He At apc oct croe_by bsg Ptitinars Cha Hae Se bln Cava Cort-of General Sussfons nuked. Saljact Mae nnn utidiction to entertain, avd. avd jude, Petitioners Pecttall mation ean hen the teeanasl wah. presided. tlass.ct Varcotan outst Ms anssiued. odeisl Const

IV. &' Did The 5.6. Sopteme Court ertar_by beam Rebitionees Federal Factual pn pide ath pp it ha nd ta unssl. utes Ltonsttbrtiednl, Ml oud.tbecly Vaid da. an (Gourt Sloouhtaneous! vesctiona huis Compencten jatheile Ne asers Pros SC doco

V. Dl. See Sc, Spans oa wie Jung Pliner! hal peeiate Hst be as denied effective assstoae of fomsel beer art his Compenrte.rs (hear held. ow Apel 10M 2000.

VI. Ute 80 hp ot sey by Bas Fel Sat po educate Hot be wars dewied, effective assisteace of Counsel when is Gasse. was Demanded, from the 80 Court oF AppeclS back to BO cece nena (67. werail Sessions Court of Ratcblend Goutby A anemone

VII. Die The 8.6. Supeme Court enter by. boring Petitioners Fedesas! Faxctuwlpredvvoste an th atthe sass dewied, eective essishonce of lavasel anr_his fist appeal a ee

VIII. Did te 8.6. Supceme. Court eorar-by barciny fettionets Faderasl Fach! predicate pT he Was denied ePfective assistance of Counsel an his tirst.appeasl uber. etower relieved. himselfcas Counsel do to misteatmemt.

IX. Did The SC. Coutt of Apenls sepie Appellee Court Tedichon ule Hate fe nio eration). presevted, ta tve Court to telustarte the appeal from Hoe Court. lof. Gewera:l Sessions from the attempt to tepaic the tramserph 2.

X. ) the $.6 Sypems, Gaurt eror by baring Retiioners fechas predieasts thart-he | _ lid riot hove. ox futhond: fare bite ot the Dost Conwichians telief EcRasyple

XI. hte Speen Cugt aac by bo Beitaoes Bacbucl

Whether the S.C. Supreme Court erred by barring Petitioners' Federal Factual predicate that he was denied effective assistance of counsel