Whether the due process clause was violated by failure to prove every element of money laundering beyond a reasonable doubt

QUESTIONS PRESENTED (1) WHETHER THE DUE PROCESS CLAUSE OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT WAS VIOLATED IN THE CASE OF AREVALO, BECAUSE HIS PROSECUTION FAILED TO PROVE BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT, EVERY ELEMENT OF THE CRIME, ESPECIALLY WITH RESPECT TO THE "MONEY LAUNDERING" ACTIVITIES, ALLEGEDLY TAKEN BY AREVALO IN ARIZONA, WHICH HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE MONEY LAUNDERING PROCEEDS, WHICH HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ALLEGED DRUG CRIMES IN FLORIDA. (2) WHETHER A PANEL OF THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS ABUSED ITS DISCRETION WHEN IT DISMISSED AREVALO'S PETITION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY , BY DEPARTING FROM JUDICIAL PRECEDENT WHICH FLATLY PROHIBITS SUCH A DEPARTURE PROSCRIBED BY 28 U.S.C. SECTION 2253. (3) WHETHER AREVALO'S INVOCATION OF THE CAUSE AND PREJUDICE DOCTRINE, ALLIED WITH AN ACTUAL INNOCENCE CLAIM, ENTITLES HIM TO A MERITS DETERMINATION BY ASSOCIATE JUSTICE CLARENCE JUSTICE THOMAS PURSUANT TO RULE 22-1 OF THE SUPREME COURT RULES.