Whether Petitioner had the Fourth Amendment rights as a United States Citizen to be advised of his rights to the 'expectation of privacy' during a detained traffic stop, before being asked to sign a contract form to Search the vehicle? And whether the state trooper's failure to show concern about Petitioner's age, education, or intelligence rendered his consent to search the vehicle involuntarily, and not intelligently given under the Fourth Amendment? And under these circumstances, should this Court decide whether the consent form to search a vehicle is too unconstitutionally vague for a layman person to understand the rights he or she is waiving under the Fourth Amendment?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED ; The questions important to this case are: : I. Whether Petitioner had the Fourth Amendment rights as a United States Citizen to be advised of his rights to the "expectation of privacy" during a detained traffic stop, before being asked to sign a contract form to . Search the vehicle? And whether the state trooper's failure to show concern about Petitioner's age, education, or intelligence rendered his consent to search the vehicle involuntarily, and not intelligently given under the Fourth Amendment? And under these circumstances, should this Court decide whether the consent form to search a vehicle is too unconstitutionally vague for a layman person to understand the rights he or she is waiving under the Fourth Amendment? II. Whether Petitioner's two New Jersey prior state convictions qualify as a "serious drug or controlled substance offenses" under the "categorical apptoach,"' and whether his career offender status is rendered invalid, by — New Jersey statute lacking a mens rea? This question should be held in abeyance until this Court makes a decision in Shular v. United States, 18-6662 (2019). i