q1) IF EDVIDENCE IS INHERITED BY THE GOVERNMENT FROM THE PETI. TIONER! RONALD R MYLES, JR'S STATE OF OHIO, AGGRAVATED, 29?
ROBBERY CASE, 16-CR-0337, TO BE USED AGAINST HIM IN FEDERAL |
DISTRICT COURT, DOES PRIOR STATE "RULINGS" IN CASE NUMBER
337, RECEIVE RES JUDICATAS PRECLUSIVE EFFECT IN FEDERAL
DISTRICT COURT?

92) THE SIXTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS, HAS AFFIRMED IN THEIR
FINAL JUDGMENT ENTRY, ON FEBRUARY 21, 2019, THAT THE STATE
COURT OF OHIO GAVE A FINAL JUDGMENT RULING IN RELATION TO
THE SEIZING OF MR MYLES PRIVATE PROPERTY, ON JUNE 17, 2016
AT HIS DAYS INN HOTEL ROOM, THAT THE JUNE 6, 2016, STATE
WARRANT, WAS THE SOLE WARRANT IN MR~MYLES STATE OF OHIO ...
AGGRAVATED ROBBERY CASE, NUMBER 337, AT THE JULY 21, 2016
STATE PRE-TRIAL. SHOULD THAT JUNE OTH WARRANT RULING...
HANDED DOWN BY THE STATE COURT, RECEIVE RES JUDICATAS "PRECLUSIVE EFFECT" IN A FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT?

93) IF THE JUNE 6TH WARRANT "RULING" IS GIVEN RES JUDICATAS
"PRECLUSIVE EFFECT," BASE ON U.S.C. § 1738, FULL "FAITH
. AND CREDIT ACT," DOES A JUNE 17TH, 2016 STATE WARRANT,
"LACKS SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION," IN A FEDERAL DISTRICT
COURT?

94) ONCE THE GOVERNMENT INHERITED EVIDENCE FROM MR MYLES STATE
AGGRAVATED ROBBERY CASE, #337, AS WELL AS ANY PRIOR RULINGS
IN THAT CASE, TO BE USED AGAINST HIM IN A FEDERAL INDICTMENT,
DOES THE ROOKER FELDMAN DOCTRINE BAR THE GOVERNMENT, FROM
RECEIVING A[N] APPELLATE REVIEW OF THE JUNE 6TH WARRANT :
RULING BEING THE SOLE WARRANT IN THAT CASE?

95) DID THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BECOME A PARTY OR PRIVY POSING
AS THE FIRST TO MR MYLES STATE OF OHIO AGGRAVATED ROBBERY
CASE #337, ONCE THEY TRIED TO APPEAL THE JUNE 6TH WARRANT
RULING, BY ASKING THE DISTRICT COURT TO APPLY A "GOOD
FAITH" EXCEPTION, TO A[N] ALLEGED JUNE 17TH STATE WARRANT.
THAT DOES NOT MATCH THE STATE OF OHIO'S RULING, AT THE
JULY 21, 2OI6 STATE PRE-TRIAL? MONTANA V UNITED STATES,
(1979)? .

96) THE STATE OF OHIO HAS ADMITTED THROUGH WRITTEN MOTION, ON
NOVEMBER 6, 2018, (21 MONTHS AFTER FEDERAL CONVICTION AND
INCARCERATION), THAT THE STATE COURT OF OHIO, HAS NEVER
ORDERED MR MYLES PRIVATE

Whether the lower court erred in its interpretation of the relevant constitutional and statutory provisions