Does the Confrontation Clause allow the Petitioner to be convicted at trial—using preliminary hearing testimony of an unavailable witness—of an offense that was not charged at the time of the preliminary hearing?

Does a preliminary hearing provide an "adequate opportunity" for cross-examination under the Confrontation Clause when the most serious charge against the petitioner did not exist at the time of the hearing and the only witness at the hearing feigned memory loss?

Whether the Confrontation Clause permits conviction of an offense not charged at the preliminary hearing based on testimony of an unavailable witness who feigned memory loss at that hearing, when the defendant had no opportunity to cross-examine regarding the subsequently-charged offense