Question not identified

QUESTION PRESENTED PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI Qi . In adherence to the Five (5). Year Statute of Limitation and the submitted questions in support and protection of the Petitioner of the Alleged Claim of the violation of Statue 666, in Section 11 of this document, within the Reason For Granting the Petition, pg. 29 as the Petitioner’s . ——arcor offered to SCOTUS? the actual Grant Award” Notification Letter issued" by the-u'sDepartment of Education signed and dated July 01, 2007 as confirmation of approval for program services to begin by ASKIA Leaning. This is one of many ongoing following items of Exculpatory Evidence that is part of the original approved Program Application. Also, the Petitioner’s proof of actual innocence and his Sixth Amendment Rights for his request for his Constitutional Law Protection of the Five (5) Year Statute of Limitation. A wide range of Exculpatory Evidence not only strongly agrees with the U.S. Department of Education confirming the actual official start date of July 01, 2007, it also confirms the petitioner’s consistent claim that the Five (5) year Statute of Limitation had run. Therefore, the Petitioner believes his question for his constitutional protection to the SCOTUS is ripe by asking, how could the Lower Court appear to embrace an oversight of the U.S. Department of Education’s signed document displaying of July 01, 2007 as start date and then willingly embrace August , 23, 2007 as start time? Thereby, preventing the proper protection within the Lower Courts of the Petitioner’s Sixth Amendment Rights. Does this contrast of time make the contrast in time between the U.S. Department of Education signed and dated July 01, 2007 official start time and the Government’s Argument Alleged Claim of August 23, 2007 as start time ripe for consideration and grounds for the United States Supreme Court to dismiss and or nullification of the original adjudication and indictment against the Petitioner? 6 : re a PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI Q2 . In adherence to the Five (5) Year Statute of Limitation, a protection provided by Constitutional Law; document submitted below in this document Section 11, Reason for Granting the Petition, pg. 30 as the Petitioner’s proof; the actual Affidavit from the Boys and Girls Club is signed and dated July 09, 2007 as official acknowledgement of approval for program operation, acknowledging the stated date of the program as July 01, 2007 with 41 kids, averaging 5 hours a , ‘ day, participated in a wide range of activities in the ASKIA Summer Mini Camp. This is the Petitioner’s proof of actual innocence and again confirming the Petitioner’s consistent claim that the Five (5) year Statute of Limitation had run. The Petitioner believes his question to the SCOTUS is ripe by asking, how could the Lower Court dismiss the signed Affidavit from the Boys and Girls. Club showing July 01, 2007 start date? Thereby, preventing the proper protection of the Petitioner’s Sixth Amendment Right? Therefore, does this make the Alleged Claim of the one count indictment grounds for the United States Supreme Court to dismiss the . original adjudication and indictment against the Petitioner? PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI . Q3 In adherence to the Five (5) year statute of limitation, a protection provided by Constitutional Law; document submitted below Section 11, Reason for Granting the Petition, pg. 31 as the Petitioner’s proof: the actual marketing flyer, acknowledging the ASKIA Summer Mini Camp start date as July 01, 2007 with a wide range of activities. This is the Petitioner’s proof of actual innocence and again confirming the Petitioner’s consistent claim that the Five (5) year Statute of Limitation had run. Therefore, the Petitioner believes his question to the SCOTUS is ripe by asking, how could the Lower Court dismiss the marketing flyer handed out in the community and approved by the Department of Education, Little Rock showing the July 01 2007 start date? Thereby, prev