Whether the evidence acquired during Mr. Heximer's illegal detention is inadmissible under clearly-established law

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED ; (1) WHETHER THE EVIDENCE ACQUIRED DURING MR. HEXIMER'S ILLEGAL S DETENTION IS/WAS INADMISSIBLE UNDER CLEARLY-ESTABLISHED LAW ? (2) WHETHER THE 53RD DISTRICT MAGISTRATE HAD ABSOLUTELY NO ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE, FACTS OR TESTIMONY -LET ALONE A COMPETENT WITNESS -BEFORE HIM TO: (A) CONFER JURISDICTION: (B) ESTABLISH THE REQUIRED FOURTH AMENDMENT FINDING OF PROBABLE CAUSE TO CHARGE ANY. CRIME(S): OR (C) ISSUE CRIMINAL PROCESS AGAINST MR. HEXIMER 2? oo . (3) WHETHER THE 53RD DISTRICT JUDGE HAD ABSOLUTELY NO ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE, FACTS OR TESTIMONY AT THE PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION -LET ALONE JURISDICTION ~TO FIND PROBABLE CAUSE THAT A CRIME WAS COMMITTED UNDER MCL § 750.157B2 OR THAT MR. HEXIMER HAD COMMITTED ANY CRIME(S) -TO BIND THE MATTER OVER TO THE CIRCUIT COURT ? (4) WHETHER A CONVICTION PRONOUNCED BY THE 44TH CIRCUIT COURT WITHOUT ANY ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE, FACTS OR TESTIMONY -~ AND THE WANT OF PERSONAM & SUBJECT-MATTER JURISDICTION -IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL ? (5) WHETHER THE PROSECUTOR COMMITTED FRAUD UPON THE COURTS, MR. HEXIMER AND PUBLIC -WHERE THERE WAS ABSOLUTELY NO ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE, FACTS OR TESTIMONY -LET ALONE JURISDICTION -TO PURSUE THE SOLICITATION CHARGE AGAINST MR HEXIMER (A DISABLED ; VETERAN) DUE TO HIS ILLEGAL DETENTION ? _ (6) WHETHER THE PLAINTIFF'S FAILURE TO ANSWER OR MEET ITS BURDEN OF DEMONSTRATING SUBJECT-MATTER JURISDICTION IN ANY OF THE MICHIGAN COURTS (44TH CIRCUIT, COURT OF APPEALS, SUPREME COURT) CONSTITUTES ' ° FORFELTURE AND/OR WAIVER ?