Fratta v. Texas

(1) Whether, under the ruling in Shinn v. Ramirez, state courts are required to accept and rule on the merits of claims presented in writs of habeas corpus by prisoners who lawfully dismiss their attorneys to be incompliance with state procedures and file the claims pro se because the attorneys neglected or refused to do so; (2) whether unindicted actors can be added into an accused's jury charge when his indictment charges him as the only actor to commit the offense; and (3) whether it is constitutional for a grand jury to sign off on an indictment when the elements of the offense sought are not satisfied or could not have been satisfied by the government to begin with.