Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit err in granting the government's motion to dismiss by denying the Petitioner the ability to have his substantive constitutional, statutory, and other legal claims addressed, such constitutional, statutory, and other legal claims being of such a fundamental nature that grave injustice will result to Petitioner and similarly situated incarcerated persons if these claims are not addressed?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit err in granting the government’s motion to dismiss by denying the Petitioner the ability to have his substantive constitutional, statutory, and other legal claims addressed, such constitutional, statutory, and other legal claims being of such a fundamental nature that grave injustice will result to Petitioner and similarly situated incarcerated persons if these claims are not addressed? Did the District Court misapply the United States Sentencing Guidelines (“USSG”) when it found Petitioner was in Criminal History Category V? Did the district court abuse its discretion in finding that a sentence of eightyfour (84) months was reasonable under the circumstances pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)? Did the District Court’s imposition of mandatory “special assessments” pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3013 violate the Petitioner’s Eighth Amendment right against excessive fines by allowing no discretion or proportionality to relate the fine in any reasonable way to the offense charged? Does the mandatory “special assessment,” as it is currently administered, violate the Origination Clause of the Constitution of the United States because it provides significant revenue to the general treasury and the bill originated in the Senate of the United States?