Whether petitioner's Florida capital life prison sentence with a 25-year minimum mandatory followed by eligibility for parole under Florida Statute §775.082(6)(1987) is an indefinite/indeterminate prison sentence in direct conflict with the Florida Constitution Article I, Section 17, and a violation of the U.S. Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments

No question identified. : INMATE '19/5/7 A61D011013714 79674 . '19/5/7 i QUESTION ONE IS PETITIONER’S FLORIDA CAPITAL LIFE PRISON SENTENCE WITH A 25 YEAR MINIMUM MANDATORY FOLLOWWED BY ELIGIBILITY FOR PAROLE UNDER FLORIDA STATUTE §775.082 (6) (1987), AN INDEFINITE / INDETERMINATE PRISON SENTENCE; MAKIONG IT IN DIRECT CONFLICT WITH THE FLORIDA CONSTITUTION ARTICLE ONE, SECTION 17, THAT “FORBIDS” INDEFINITE PRISON SENTENCES; A UNITED STATES SIXTH, _ EIGHTH, AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATION; AND THE STATE OF FLORIDA NOT FOLLOWING IS OWN CONSTITUTION, THAT RESULTED IN AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL FLORIDA STATUTE AND PETITIONER BEING CONFINED IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA IN DIRECT VIOLATION OF THE LAWS AND CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES, WHICH WOULD AID IN THIS COURTS APPELLATE JURISDICTION? NO REASONABLE JKURIST WOULD HAVE SENTENCED PETITIONER TO AN INDEFINITE PRISON SENTENCE IN DIRECT VIOLATION OF THE FLORIDA CONSTITUTION ARTICLE I, SECTION 17. ° . 1 INMATE 19/5/7 A61D011013714 79674 . INMATE '19/5/7 A61D011013714 79674 19/5/7 de i “QUESTION TWO THE FLORIDA LEGISLATURE CREATED AND THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT HAS SUSTAINED FLORIDA PAROLE STATUTE §947. (1987); IN A MANNER THAT DIRECTLY CONFLICTS WITH THIS COURTS 2013 UNITED STATES SIXTH AMENDMENT CONSTITUTIONAL FINDINGS OF A RIGHT TO A STATE STATUTORY MINIMUM PRISON SENTENCE; WHEREIN FLORIDA STATUTE §947, PROVIDES THE FLORIDA COMMISSION ON OFFENDER REVIEW (THE FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION); AFTER 25 YEARS OF INCARCERAION, TOTAL DISCRETION TO MAKE CRIMINAL FINDINGS OF FACT THAT AGGRAVATES PETITIONER’S STATUTORY MINIMUM MANDATORY PRISON SENTENCE OF LIFE WITH A 25 YEAR MINIMUM MANDATORY FOLLOWED BY ELIGIBILITY FOR PAROLE; BY 76 YEARS, 2 MONTHS; THAT IGNORES PETITIONER’S PLEA BARGAIN, NO NOTICE, PETITIONER’S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO SPEEDY SENTENCING JUDGMENT, _ DOUBLE JEOPARDY, AND FLORIDA CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATIONS; THAT NOW FORMS A CONSTITUTIONAL PART OF A NEW OFFENSE, THAT HAD NOT BEEN SUBMITTED TO A ~—"JGRY OR ADMITTED TO BY PETITIONER FOR AGGRAVATION OF PAROLE DATE: THAT HAS CREATED A COMPELLING EXTRAORDINARY QUESTION OF UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT AND FEDERAL CASE LAW; AS TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTIONALITY OF FLA. STAT. §947, AS APPLIED TO PETITIONER AND WHETHER PETITIONER IS BEING CONFINED IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA IN DIRECT VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES AND THE SIXTH, EIGHTH AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS OF. THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION; THAT HAS NOT BEEN, BUT SHOULD BE, SETTLED BY THIS COURT OF LAST RESORT, THAT WILL AID IN THIS COURTS APPELLATE JURISDICTION? li INMATE '19/5/7 A61D011013714 79674 . INMATE '19/5/7 A61D011013714 79674 ‘ 19/5/7 QUESTION THREE THE UNITED STATES ELEVENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS HAS SUSTAINED FROM THE LOWER TRIBUNAL AN IMPORTANT FEDERAL QUESTION OF HABEAS CORPUS VS. CIVIL ACTION, AND RIGHT TO APPEAL; IN TWEED V. GOVERNOR OF STATE OF FLORIDA, et. al. CASE NO: 14-11099c FILED (MAIL BOX RULE) APRIL 28, 2014, DENIED, NOV. 5, 2014; TAKEN FROM THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT, MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA, TAMPA DIVISION; TWEED V. RICK SCOTT, et. al., CASE NO. 8:14-CV-217-T-23 MAP; WHO RULED PETITIONER’S CIVIL ACTION OF LIMITED NARROW U.S. CONSTITUTIONALITY OF FLORIDA SENTENCING STATUTE OF LIFE UNDER §775.082(1) AND (6)(1987), A HABEAS : CORPUS, WHEREIN, PETITIONER SOUGHT NO IMMEDIATE RELEASE OR REDUCTION IN HIS PRISON SENTENCE AND WAS DENIED A RIGHT TO APPEAL WITH SANCTIONS OF FRIVOLOUS; THAT NOW REMAINS AS PRESIDENT IN BOTH FEDERAL COURTS, THAT ESTABLISHES A SUBSTANTIAL, QUESTION OF A COMPELLING EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCE OF CONTROLLING HABEAS CORPUS FINDINGS IN THOSE COURTS THAT ARE IN DIRECT CONFLICT WITH THIS COURT, AND WHETHER ABUSE OF DISCRETION” OCCURRED RESULTING IN SANCTIONS AGAINST PETITIONER THAT WARRANT THIS COURTS EXERCISE OF DISCRETIONARY POWERS; AND REVIEW, WHERE RELIEF CANNOT BE OBTAINED IN ANY OTHER FORM OR OF FROM ANY OTHER COURT. THIS WILL AID IN THIS COURTS APPELLATE JURISDICTION. ili INMATE '19/5/7 A61D011013714 79674 INMATE '19