Did Louisiana Courts err in denying Dylan Magluilo right to a fair trial and subsequent review when rejecting claims involving, Conflicting Decisions of this Honorable Court?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Did Louisiana Courts err in denying Dylan Magluilo right to a fair trial and subsequent review when rejecting claims involving, Conflicting Decisions of this Honorable Court? The State Court erroneously interpreted the application of constitutional law causing material injustice and significantly affects the public interest. Louisiana Courts also grosely departed from proper judicial proceedings in this case abusing its powers in such ways causing this Court to exercise ite authority. Mr. Magluila contends, the Louisiana Second Circuit Court of Appeals and State Supreme Court erred in upholding the convictions and sentences in this case. This error is in direct conflict with jurisprudence set by those Court and this Honorable Court. The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitutions provides inter alia that, “...no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.” The Fourteenth Amendment imposes the same due process requirement on the States. Implicit in the due process clause is the protection of an accused against conviction except upon proof beyond a reasonable doubt of every fact necessary to constitute the crime with which he is charged. Jz Re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 90 S.Ct. L068, 25 L.Ed.2d 368 (1970); Jackson v. Urpinia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 38.Ct. 2781, 61 L-Ed.2d 560 (1979). An accused is entitled to an appellate review of the evidence to the extent that it supports a finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. i