What are the necessary components for the trial court to be complete and hold jurisdiction over a case and was Avitabile's trial court complete?

Questions Presented Q1) What are the necessary components for the trial court to be complete and hold jurisdiction over a case and was Avitabile’s trial court complete? Q2) Does an actual conflict of interest create a situation in which constructive denial of counsel exists, requiring the case to be overturned ? Q3) Was Avitabile constructively denied counsel at trial by an attorney who worked to ensure a conviction for the prosecution? Q4) _ Did the U.S. State Department ever revoke the exequatur from the Italian Royal Families? Q5) Was the Wyoming State District Court capable of having jurisdiction over a European Royal without first contacting the US State Department and secondly transferring the case to Federal District Court to cure want of jurisdiction? Q6) Did the Petitioner’s Trial Court have jurisdiction over 1) the subject matter; 2) the person; 3) the location of the alleged crime? Q7) Did Petitioner ever legally change his name to “Andrew J. Larson”? Q8) Is Petitioner Andrew J. Avitabile or Andrew Larson; and what is the basis for that decision? Q9) Is it constitutionally allowable for a State to pass a statute that presumes guilt and places the burden of proving innocence upon the defendant? Q10) Is Wyoming Statute 6-2-311 unconstitutional and is Wyoming using this statute to convict innocent men of crimes they never committed? Q11) Does the evidence show that the crime that Avitabile is accused of never occurred and should Avitabile be released because his guilty plea was coerced despite his being innocent? Q12) An the State of Wyoming or the Wyoming Supreme Court change the name of a litigant or the name in a caption without the consent of the parties involved without the litigant requesting his name be changed? Inmate #23916 i Avitabile — Writ of Certiorari on State Habeas Corpus 2019