Whether lower courts should follow the Supreme Court's mandate in Tolan v. Cotton when ruling on a motion for summary affirmance

QUESTIONS PRESENTED . The following questions are presented for the Court’s review: 1. In the context of a Motion for Summary Affirmance of a District Court ; decision, should lower courts follow the mandate of this Supreme Court — most recently reaffirmed in Tolan v. Cotton, 572 US, 134 S. Ct., 188 L Ed | , 2d 895, 2014 US LEXIS 3112 which requires that “in ruling on a motion : for summary judgment, ‘the evidence of the non-movant is to be believed, and all justifiable inferences are to be drawn in his favor” — particularly when the evidence clearly supports the non-movant’s position? 2. Did the Second Circuit Court of Appeals overstep its boundaries when it opined on the merits of a 28 U.S.C. 2255 petition prior to the issuance of the District Court’s final decision, and within the context of an interlocutory ; appeal regarding release on bail; a proceeding which calls for using criteria . similar to that used to deliberate on the grant a Certificate of Appealability? 3. Should the existence of multiple errors that support a 28 U.S.C. 2255 | petition, particularly when several of those errors are structural in nature and | merit automatic reversal, be considered sufficient to meet the “extraordinary “circumstances” test used by courts to evaluate the applicability of release on bail pending a habeas appeal? . i REFERENCED CASES AT THE DISTRICT AND APPELLATE LEVELS AND LIST OF KEY PARTIES The decision pertaining to this Petition is the Second Circuit Court of . Appeal’s Grant of the Government’s Motion for Summary Affirmance (the “Summary Affirmance”) of the District Court for the District of Connecticut’s Order (the “Order”) denying my motions for supervised release or bail pending resolution of my Motion to Vacate Conviction and Sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. . . 2255 (the “Habeas Petition”). The applicable lower court cases are the following: US. v. Illarramendi — United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, . Docket No. 18-35 (the “Circuit Court Proceeding”) US. v. Illarramendi — Case Docket No. 3:16-cv-01853 (SRU) — Proceeding .. related to the Criminal Matter to Vacate the Judgement of Conviction under 28 U.S.C. 2255 due to the Violation of my Constitutional Rights (the “District Case Below” or the “Habeas Petition”). . US. v. Illarramendi — Case Docket No. 3:11-cr-00041 (SRU) in the District Court for the District of Connecticut (the “Criminal Matter”). List of Key Parties Francisco Illarramendi — Pro Se Defendant, Appellant and Petitioner at the various corresponding court levels. Government of the United States of America — Plaintiff, Appellee and Respondent at the various corresponding court levels. ii