Were petitioner's double jeopardy and due process rights violated?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Were petitioner's double jeopardy and due process rights violated by the sua sponte filing (at petitioner's sentencing) of an additional criminal charge .identical (in statute and elements) to the previous charges, using the same evidence: and course of conduct petitioner had already been investigated and prosecuted for and convicted of, thereby creating a second prosecution for the same offense, and a lack of jurisdiction at the district court level, invalidating that second conviction and the associated part of the district court's sentence of December 21, 2012 thereby infecting all subsequent proceedings to it? And, if so: 2. Did the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit and the District Court in the Seventh Circuit (Eastern Dist., Milwaukee) err in denying petitioner's . Certificate of Appealability when errors of constitutional magnitude are present? 3. Did the District Court err in denying petitioner's Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(4) motion when petitioner has shown the rule applies in this matter that he seeks to vacate the district court's Rule 4 order denying petitioner's § 2255 motion because that order was also devoid of jurisdiction as it was infected by an underlying illegal sentence. AND, if the court insists on re-classifying the 60(b)(4) motion as a subsequent 2255, does it regardless, still meet the 'gatekeeping" requirements for a subsequent 2255? 4. As such, would a failure to allow for collateral review in this matter raise . serious constitutional questions, i.e. is the Seventh Circuit re-writing the 5th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution by allowing:.a clear double jeopardy violation to stand? . i ee —— -_ — « a