QUESTON NUMBER ONE:
Whether the district court abused its discretion by failing to
conduct a prompt Evidentiary Hearing and the Sixth Circuit's affirmance
of that decision based upon Pointer's ineffectiveness claim as it relates
to failing to conduct adequate legal research; failure to thoroughly
review Indictment; and failure to file a pre-trial Motion to Dismiss
Fatally Defective Superseding Indictment, thus, did this violate his Sixth
Amendment Rights of the U.S. Constitution.

QUESTION NUMBER TWO:
Whether the district court abused its discretion by failing to
conduct a prompt Evidentiary Hearing and the Sixth Circuit's affirmance
of that decision based upon Pointer's ineffectiveness claim as it relates
by his ex-trial counsel failing to object to a determination regarding
unanimous jury verdict, thus, did this violate his Sixth Amendment
Rights of the U.S. Constitution ?

QUESTION NUMBER THREE:
Whether the district court abused its discretion by failing to
conduct a prompt Evidentiary Hearing and the Sixth Circuit's affirmance
of that decision based upon Pointer's trial stage error ineffectiveness
claim, thus, did this violate his Sixth Amendment Rights of the U.S.
Constitution ?

QUESTION NUMBER FOUR;
Whether the district court abused its discretion by failing to
conduct a prompt Evidentiary Hearing and the Sixth Circuits affirmance
of that decision based upon sentencing phase ineffectiveness claim,
thus, did this violate his Sixth Amendment Rights of the U.S.
Constitution ?

QUESTION NUMBER FIVE;
Whether the district court abused its discretion by failing to
conduct a prompt Evidentiary Hearing and the Sixth Circuits
affirmance of that decision based upon his appellate ineffectiveness
claim, thus, did this violate his Sixth Amendment Rights of the U.S.
Constitution ?

Whether the district court abused its discretion by failing to conduct a prompt Evidentiary Hearing and violating Sixth Amendment Rights through multiple ineffective assistance of counsel claims