Whether the trial court erred in admitting the appellant's post-arrest interview when the government violated his Fifth Amendment rights by forcibly using his fingerprints to attempt to unlock his cellular phone

QUESTIONS PRESENTED I. IT WAS ERROR FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO ADMIT THE APPELLANT'S POST-ARREST INTERVIEW WHEN THE GOVERNMENT VIOLATED HIS FIFTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS BY FORCIBLY USING HIS FINGER PRINTS TO ATTEMPT TO UNLOCK HIS CELLULAR PHONE. II. IT WAS ERROR FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO DENY THE APPELLANT'S REQUEST, UNDER THE SIXTH AMENDMENT COMPULSORY PROCESS FOR OBTAINING WITNESSES IN HIS FAVOR, TO INTERVIEW AND POTENTIALLY CALL HIS CO-DEFENDANT AS A WITNESS. Ill. IT WAS ERROR FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO DENY THE INCLUSION OF THE DEFENSE REQUESTED JURY INSTRUCTION FOR MULTIPLE CONSPIRACIES.