Can state District Attorney's Office and/or California Board of Parole Hearings utilize Parole Consideration Hearings as extrajudicial proceedings to retry and convict petitioner and/or other prisoners for dismissed or previously adjudicated allegations?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED . 1) Can state District Attorney’s Office and/or California Board of Parole Hearings utilize . Parole Consideration Hearings as extrajudicial proceedings to retry and convict petitioner and/or other prisoners for dismissed or previously adjudicated allegations? 2) Whether SLT District Attorney’s Office breached petitioner’s 1989 Contractual Plea. . Agreement by presenting and arguing previously dismissed allegations as integral parts a of petitioner’s conviction during a 2016 Parole Consideration Hearing. . ; 3) Whether SLT District Attorney’s Office violated petitioner’s Federal Due Process Rights and subjected him to Double Jeopardy by utilizing petitioner's 2016 Parolé Consideration Hearing as an extrajudicial court system to retry, convict, badger, ridicule, and subject . petitioner to embarrassment in relation to allegations dismissed before and during the . 1988 Preliminary Hearing. — 4) Can Parole Boards deny parole to petitioner or any other prisoner for none convictions? ; 5) Whether California Board of Parole Hearings violated Brooks Federal Due Process Rights by depriving him parole, in large part, because petitioner refused to confess to and provide insight into dismissed allegations. : . 6) Can California Board of Parole Hearings require petitioner’ to admit guilt and provide , : ; . insight into dismissed allegations as a prerequisite of granting parole? ‘ 7) Can California Board of Parole Hearings require petitioner to admit guilt of a first-degree a . murder of his wife, as a prerequisite of parole, when he was convicted of second-degree murder by way of “Contractual Plea Agreement, and entered without affirming guilt thereof. ; : . : QUESTION(S) PRESENTED « 8) Whether California Board of Prison Hearings subjected petitioner to Cruel and Unusual « Punishment by utilizing dismissed allegations to classifying him as high risk . (permanently), and thereby adding new charges to the conviction, and subsequently depriving him parole as a result thereof? a 9) Can California Board of Parole Hearings summarily exclude petitioner from the benefits ; . ; , of California’s newly enacted Youthful Offenders Act, because he refuses to admit guilt of previously dismissed allegations?