Does the 'right for the wrong reason' doctrine allow federal appellate courts to violate due process?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED The possibility for federal appellate courts to abuse the “right for the wrong reason” rule, as the rule was promulgated by this Court in Helvering v. Growran, 302 U.S. 238 (1937) and Jaftke v. Dunham, 352 U.S. 280 (1957), creates the real danger that appellants are denied due process of law under the 5th Amendment. To remove the possibility of rogue rulings under the guise of the “right for the wrong reason” doctrine, this Court should prohibit the federal appellate court from, sua sponte, deciding cases on factually laden bases never litigated or passed on as a matter of fact or law in the lower court. The Questions Presented are: 1. Does the guarantee of due process under Amendment V to the Constitution require this Court to enumerate strictures to the rule and provide guidance and instruction to the courts of appeal in the application of the rule to prevent such constitutional violations? 2. Additionally, or in the alternative, should the United States Supreme Court certify to the Florida Supreme Court the federal court’s interpretation of § 77.07, Florida Statutes, when the federal appellate court adopted a construction of the statute contrary to that in Florida jurisprudence and of which there is no controlling precedent of the Supreme Court of Florida, as permitted and encouraged by Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.030(C)?1 1 Florida Rule 9.030 Jurisdiction of Courts (a) Jurisdiction of Supreme Court of Florida. (2) Discretionary Jurisdiction. (C) Questions of law certified by the Supreme Court of the United States or a United States court of appeals that are determinative of the cause of action and for which there is no controlling precedent of the Supreme Court of Florida.