A. SHOULD UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT GRANT CERTIORARI REVIEW ON ASSAULT WITH DEADLY WEAPON CHARGE AND VACATE STATE'S COURT'S CONVICTION ON PROPENSITY EVIDENCE VIOLATIONS?

B. HAVE TRIAL JUDGE AND COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ABUSED DISCRETION BY GRANTING PROPENSITY EVIDENCE DURING PETITIONER'S ASSAULT?

C. WHERE CALIFORNIA STATE SUPREME COURT IN THE RIGHT IN DEPRIVING PETITIONER OF FUNDAMENTAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL WHEN IT CONVICTED BASED ON A NON-CONSENSUAL WAIVER OF RIGHTS?

D. WILL IT UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT RULES FOR PROPER STANDARD FOR WAIVING RIGHTS?

E. ARE STATE'S COURT REJECTION OF PETITIONER'S FEDERAL DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE AS MOST LEGITIMATE TO CLARIFY ESTABLISHED FEDERAL RULES?

F. DID CALIFORNIA TRIAL COURT VIOLATED PETITIONER'S RIGHT TO BE FREE FROM IMPEACHMENT TO DUE PROCESS CLOSURE BY ADMITTING EVIDENCE OF PRIOR VIOLENCE TITLES?

G. CAN STATE TRIAL COURTS WAIVE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS WHEN COURT OF APPEALS DENIED RIGHTS AS PLAIN?

H. WERE EACH AN ABUSE OF DISCRETION TO ALLOW PROSECUTOR CONVICTED PETITIONER FOR ASSAULT WITH A DEADLY WEAPON ABSENCE OF FINGERPRINT?

Whether California state courts violated petitioner's constitutional rights by admitting propensity evidence and convicting for assault with a deadly weapon