Defendant's speedy trial rights violated

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED 1. Defendant challenge and “impugned the integrity,” of the denial of his CPL § 30.30 speedy trial consitutional rights, which includes 409 days in excess including illusory time. 2. Bias trial prejudice to defendant — which exceeded over 3 and % years. Involuntary/coerced confession used at trial as ADA Schordine front line of defense against defendant. 3. Defendant speedy trial and Fourteen Amendment rights to due process violated and denied. 4. Defendant Fifth and Sixth Amendment to th U.S. Constitution rights violated and denied. 5. Defendant United States Constitutional law Rights. The Constitution of the State of New York law case, and Statutory law rights violated and denied. 6. Force confession under means of torture and duress extracted from defendant through enhanced interrogation technique by means of withholding exigent emergency care, threats speaking with attorney or family denied, water denied until involuntary/corce confession written. NYC-EMS 11" October 2010 at 3:35 p.m. 7. The prosecution failed to prove his case beyond a reasonable doubt. According to the victim sole eyewitness Lloyd Bethea written statement there were twenty-five plus perpetrator(s) rioting in the intersection, interfering with on-coming traffic. The People failed to meet their burden of proof under the U.S. Constitution in case 3886/10 against defendant. 8. The People framed defendant to cover up gross negligence, the 49" precinct allowed twentyfive plus perpetrator(s) fighting with all forms of weapons in the intersection to escape, because of a two hour delay in not responding to approximately fifteen to twenty 911 calls from civilians. 9. ARRAIGNMENTS October 12, 2010 defendant plead not guilty. February 15, 2011 case detail appearrance under Judge W. Mcguire, defendant plead not guilty. Under Judge Patricia Domingo jurisdiction defendant plead not guilty. March 30, 2015 prior to sentencing defendant plead not guilty. 10. Prosecutorial Vindictivevess —Unconstututional procedure enhance punishment for another offense, prejudicial. Prosecutorial Misconduct —Jury tampering which cuts into the heart of the Sixth Amendment's promise of a fair trial. Two hour surveilance tape tampered with. 11. Ineffective counsel of assistance — Counsel failure to object to prosecutorial misconduct against defendant. Counsel failure to object or protect defendant from the diabolic villanious barrage of on slaught and relentless ambush at trial and sentencing targeting defendant as a“sacrificial lamb”. Prosecution’s disparagement “exceeded fair limits of advocacy and [was] prejudicial to defendant as a matter of law.