Michael Christopher Romig v. Pennsylvania

) Was Petitioner denied meaningful effective assistance of Court appointed counsel (preliminary hearing, trial, direct appeal, and PCPA) to get and maintain conviction? Suggested Answer: YES

) Is effective assistance of counsel an ongoing problem in the state of Pennsylvania, of which needs addressed, to allow litigants a fair trial and due process? Suggested Answer: YES

) Did Petitioner exercise due diligence according to the record to attempt to rectify counsels deficiency with respect to the Bradly approach? Suggested Answer: YES 5.) Did the Superior Court error, in that newly discovered facts exception also fails, where the Trial Court failed to appoint new counsel when the Superior Court remanded to them on stewardship claim of PCRA counsel (Scoot N. Pletcher) by way of November 30, 2020 order (see Docket Entry @1168 MDA 2020) ? Suggested Answer: YES