I. Whether the Indiana Court of Appeals ' holding that Candelario Cruz-Trujillo
waived his post-conviction claim because he failed to make specific citations to the Record
in his petition for post-conviction relief and proposed findings of fact and conclusions of
law represents such a significant departure from the usual course of judicial proceedings
as to warrant Supreme Court jurisdiction?

II. Whether Candelario Cruz-Trujillo received ineffective assistance of trial counsel
due to his lawyer 's failure to object to prosecutorial misconduct?

Whether the Indiana Court of Appeals' holding that Candelario Cruz-Trujillo waived his post-conviction claim due to insufficient Record citations represents a significant departure from usual judicial proceedings, and whether Cruz-Trujillo received ineffective assistance of trial counsel for failure to object to prosecutorial misconduct