Was Petitioner Efrain Campos Denied A Fundamentally Fair Guilty Plea Procedural Execution

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED . ' 1.) Was Petitioner Efrain Campos Denied A Fundamentally Fair Guilty Plea Procedural Execution, By The With Holding Of Information By The Assistant District Attorney Regarding The State Sophistical Elimination Of Discretionary Parole Actuality Via Its "Violent Offender Incarceration Program--Tier #1" Agreement With The Federal Government? 2.) Was The Discovery Of The Hidden “Violent Offender Incarceration Program--Tier #1" Agreement Between The State Of Wisconsin And The Federal Government, A Relevant “Factor" Sufficient To Warrant An Adjustment Of Defendant Efrain Campos Sentence Structure To Meet The ‘Sentencing Courts’ Implied Promise That The Sentence It Imposed Would Provide This First Time Offender With A “Meaningful” Chance For Discretionary Parole Consideration In Approximately 17 . to 20 Years? ; 3.) Was The Hidden Actions Of The State Of Wisconsin Governments, In Its Participation In The "Violent Offender Incarceration Program--Tier #1," A Violation Of A Defendants' Right To Intelligently And Knowingly Enter Into A Plea Agreement In Which The State Selling Promise Was The "Genuine Possibility" Of Discretionary Parole Release ; Consideration In About 17 To 20 Years?. 4.) What Is the Available Procedural Review Process For Dis_ covery That The Plea Process And Sentencing Receipt Thereof, Were The Product Of Fraud In The Information Relied Upon. That Comes To Light Years Or Even Decades After The 28 U.S.C. §2254 Habeas Corpus Statutory Substitute Review Statute Of Limitation Has Expired? Is It Article #1, Section §9, Clause #2 Habeas Corpus Review Access?