Whether there was violation of due process of law by the failure of the trial court to order the mental competency evaluation and/or conduct mental competency hearing

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED 01. Whether there was violation of due process of law by the failure of the trial court to order the mental competency evaluation and/or conduct mental competency hearing with respect to Petitioner's competence to stand trial where counsel filed two unopposed motions to determine competency, and there was bonafide doubt that Petitioner was suffering from mental disease/defect? 02. Whether counsel was ineffective and guilty plea involuntary, unknowing, uninformed, unintelligent, and without understanding where guilty plea i “was; “induced by, promise, lie, threat, misrepresentation, and under i duress, while Petitioner was incompetent and suffering from mental . | disease/defect|, and counsel failed to provide adequate legal advice, “ fhiled to! put any meaningful adversial process, failed to advice on the applicable laws in relation to facts, failed to advise on true nature of the plea agreement and applicability of the United States Sentencing Guidelines? 03. Whether probable cause existed to search the Petitioner's new apartment for child pornography and/or any other evidence where only information available to agents was sexual explicit chat texts which were stale . and almost two-years old, no new information was discovered to link Petitioner's new apartment to any unlawful activity, Petitioner. had -.. moved to new apartment at another location, IP (Internet Protocol) ; address change automatically and can be easily spoofed, Facebook chat texts do not get saved on local computer, and agents already had all chat texts? 04. Whether government breached the plea agreement by demanding a sentence beyond parties' intent (guidelines sentence) where government did not stipulate to any applicable guidelines, base offense level, any enhancements, guidelines range, and calculated guidelines range was 4% times (135-168 months) longer than the actual applicable guidelines . range (30-37 months), and whether this ambiguity should have been resolved against the government? ii