(1) DOES TRIAL COUNSEL'S FAILURE TO INVESTIGATE, PROCURE EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE (SECURITY CAMERA FOOTAGE), OTHER INFORMATION FROM THE LOCATION CRIME SCENE ABROGATE APPELLANT'S 6th AND 14™ AMENDMENT RIGHTS TO CONFRONT A WITNESS AND TO DUE PROCESS RESPECTIVELY?

(2) THE HONORABLE COURT ISSUED A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY TO REVIEW ONE ISSUE; WHETHER THE DISTRICT COURT ERRED BY FINDING THAT GROUND (3) OF SCOTT PETITIONER'S FIRST AMENDED PETITION IN PART, SUCH THAT ONLY HIS CLAIM THAT COUNSEL WAS INEFFECTIVE FOR FAILING TO REVIEW SECURITY CAMERA FOOTAGE COULD BE REVIEWED AS TIMELY?

(3) THE QUESTION PRESENTED CONCERNS THE TIMELINESS OF APPELLANTS 6™ AMENDMENT CLAIM THAT COUNSEL FAILED TO INVESTIGATE AND OBTAIN SURVEILLANCE VIDEO FROM THE SHOP WHERE THE INCIDENT GIVING RISE TO THE INSTANT CHARGES TOOK PLACE?

Whether trial counsel's failure to investigate and procure exculpatory security camera footage abrogates the appellant's Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights to confront witnesses and due process