Whether it is legal, lawful, and constitutional for states to manipulate distinctly explained statutes in order to present charges

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED 1. Whether it is legal, lawful, and constitutional for states to manipulate distinctly explained statutes in order to present charges. Consequently, charging the specified act of committing a crime based on the states presumed intent for a defendant to commit a crime versus charging a crime based off of the intent of an actual committed crime. 2, Whether there is sufficient evidence to justify the charging of a crime without the involvement of a criminal act or corpus delecti. Should a court charge a defendant with a specified offense if the offense was never committed. 3. Whether it is legal, lawful, and constitutional for states to knowingly falsify documentation (perjury) in order to charge a crime that specifically states an overt act even when the crime was not committed, but was presumed to have a possibility of occurring. 4 : i : : .