Whether the lower court erred in its application of the legal standard for evaluating a claim under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment

Questions for Review Pursuant to SCR 14 (1) (a) I. With all due respect, if it pleases the Court, was I denied due process of law in violation of the Fourteenth — Amendment and the Wisconsin Constitution by the circumstance that my convictions were affirmed after in June 2012 the State tried me under an information charging me with two sexual assaults of a child by contact of one } Shalonda between June 16, 2009 and June 15, 2010 at 611 N. 25 Street and two sexual assaults of a child by intercourse of one Kenneth between November 22, 2009 and August 30, 2010 at 611 N. 25" Street but the State did not produce evidence to support a guilty verdict beyond a reasonable doubt on sexual contact at the foregoing address during the specified time period identified in the information and as instructed to the jury as it pertained to Shalonda, and did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that two sexual assaults took place during the specified time period as it pertained to Kenneth; and, Wisconsin has ruled favorably for the defendant under this circumstance in the past? . II. With all due respect, if it pleases the Court, was I denied of my rights to a speedy trial in violation of the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment and the Wisconsin Constitution by the circumstance that 15 months of an18-month delay was caused by court congestion, scheduling problems within the D.A.'s office, the States attempt to find a nonkey witness, unknown obligations that restrained the State from trying the case for over three months, and cavalier disregard toward my rights where approximately one-half of the 18-month delay was due to the State's repeated failure to provide me with exculpatory phone records; I demanded trial on at least three occasions and presented other speedy trial correspondence to the court on at least three more occasions, and, in addition to several other allegations of prejudice, the span of time between the charges and trial diminished witnesses ability to clearly remember the . alleged events? ; TIL. With all due respect, if it pleases the Court, was I deprived of my rights to effective assistance of counsel in violation of the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment and the Wisconsin Constitution by the circumstance that soon _ after the trial court established what were my impeachable convictions so I could testify on my own behalf and explained to me on record that no one could go into the nature of what they were as long as I testified truthfully as to . the number of convictions, defense counsel decided to question me about the nature of those convictions, some of which the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin said painted me as an untruthful person in a trial where credibility was crucial to my case and corroborated a key State's witnesses’ testimony; and defense counsel did not object when the State told the jury during closing argument that because I had a sexual relationships with two women, my biological son's mother and the alleged victims mother, during the same period, it showed that I had the character and propensities of a person whod sexually assault a child? 2 .