Are (Navajo Indians) Native American Indians U.S. citizens within the jurisdictions of 18 U.S.C.S § 1153 (Indian Country)?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED . y#l. Are (Navajo Indians)" Native American Indians U.S. citizens | within the jurisdictions of 18 U.sS.c.S § 11532 (Indian Country)? ; ite yes, As veconized U.S. citizens, are Indians afforded bhe~samne i? Fequal protection as all U S. citizens under the 0.8. Constitution “amendments; Specificly, on Sixth Amendment premises? . ae #2. Who is the Supreme Law of the land in reguard to full scope . ‘of protections under the Sixth Amendment; in requards to appoint— ‘ment of counsel to indigent defendants? The united States “supreme Court, Or: The Navajo Nation Supreme Court. . #30 Would uncounseled convictions (misdemeanors or Felonys) [originating from 18 U.sS.c.S. § £153: be inadmissable under Fed. R. : lof Crim: P. Rules 401, 402, 403 and/or otherwise considered . federal jurisdiction prosecutions? If yes: would uncounslee os , : . [convictions be inadmissable the same within p.S.t. reports? if 7 yes, be inadmissable in criminal history points that.increase _ : | category and/or level in sentencing guide-lines charts? If yes, ne inadmissable to as upward points:toe increase sentencing. guide : levels? with clear finding of any of the use of these above desleribed uncounseled convictions, in any of the proceeding, shall ; ; ; Ait warrant, a new trail and/or new sentencing? And/or-under a questions #1, #2, #3 ? Under Standards of Strickland ¥oo “Washington, 446 U.S. 668, 80 L. Ed. 24 674, 104 S. Ct. 2052 (1984) . (27 Timier Gideon V. Wainwright, 372 U-S. 335, 9 be Ba. 2d 799, 83 7 , , ‘s. Ct. 792, 93 ALR2d 733 (1963)?;0Urder Powell v¥. Alabama, 77 be ‘Bd. 158, 287.U.S-.(1932)?; Under the unconstitional SILVER © | PLATTER DOCTRINE, in Elkins v. United States, 4 L. Ed. 2d 1669, : 364 U.S. 206 (1960)22 treatys? |