Whether the trial Courts denial of Petitioners Writ of Habeas Corpus Filed Pursuant to florida Rules of Court 3.850 (m) alleging that Petitioner Could have filed a timely ineffective assistance of Counsel Claim based on Counsel's misadvice about Sentence enhancement for Subsequent Sentencing violated the United States Constitutional Rights of Petitioner Pursuant to Amendment fourteenth. when the ruling conflicts with Stare decisis case law from the florida Supreme Court were it was found that affirmative misadvice by Counsel about the Collateral effect. of future Sentence-enhancing Potential does not meet strickland's requirements for a valid claim of ineffective assistance of Counsel.

and,

Whether denying Petitioner relief under the State Habeas Corpus, under the circumstances, denied Petitioner a cure for the Procedural due Process violated? Amendment 14th

Whether the trial court's denial of petitioner's writ of habeas corpus led to a violation of the petitioner's constitutional rights under the Fourteenth Amendment