Whether the State Court had caused a conflict within the State Court ignoring its controlling governed caselaw

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED . 1.) Whether the''State Court had caused.a conflict within the . . ‘State Court ignoring its controlling governed caselaw People v. Thomason 173 Mich. App, 812(quoting Grigg v. People 31 Mich. . 470.471) states that: “Where the record does not reveal that the defendant was arraigned, the conviction must be set aside"...And the Petitioner was not arraigned upon his warrantless arrest and _ a _ there's no record/transcript within the court file? : 2.) Where there is a mandatory Michigan Court Rule MCR 6.104(F) that provided: "A verbatim record must be made of the arraignment." And a controlling State Court caselaw that states: . Where the record does not. reveal that the defendant was . atraigned, the conviction must be set aside. “Thomas 173 Mich. App, 812 (qouting Grigg 31 Mich. at 471). Is the. lower State Court bound to act upon its mandatory court rule that's connected . to a controlling State caselaw remedy, where there is no verbatim record within the court file to show that an arraignment was truly beld? 3.) Whether a person is under a continuation of restraint of his liberty by the State's failure to arraign him on his warrantless : arrest upon the complaint and warrant and allowed the case to ‘ proceed forward without conducting such arraignment, that resulted in a conviction? ; 4,) What is the proper remedy. for a violation of. a person's Due : Process Rights through the 14th Amendment, when the State Court cannot produce a record/transcript of .an Arraignment being held on a person that was arrested without a warrant for two different felony offenses and was never brought before a Magistrate Judge to be arraigned on the Complaint and warrant, and the State still proceeded forward with the felony prosecution? ,