Did The District Court Abused Its Discretion In Binding Over To Circuit Court And The Circuit Court Erred In Refusing To Quash The Information?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Did The District Court Abused Its Discretion In Binding Over To Circuit Court And The Circuit Court Erred In Refusing To Quash The Information? Did The Trial Court Abused Its Discretion In Denying The Motion To Quash The Information And Dismiss The Charges With Prejudice When It Was Discovered That Clearly Exculpatory Evidence Had Been Lost Do To Negligence Of The Police In Mailing It To An Independent Laboratory For DNA Testing. The Trial Court Erroneously Ruled That The Evidence Was Not Clearly Exculpatory And Due Process Requires That The Conviction Be Vacated And The Charges Be Dismissed. U.S. Const. Am XIV. Additionally, The Trial Court Reversibly Erred In Failing To Give An Adverse Inference Instruction To The Jury? ; Did The Trial Court Abused Its Discretion In Failing To Admit Evidence Under MRE 404(B) That The Putative Third Party Assailant Had Choked His Daughter With A Wooden Stick Such That She Suffered Blunt Force Trauma When The Forensic Evidence Showed That The Deceased Suffered Blunt Force Trauma, As Well As Stab Wounds, And A Tree Branch Was Found Over His Body? Was Petitioner Denied A Fair Trial And Due Process Of Law, And Did The Trial Court Abused Its Discretion In Failing To Order A Mistrial, When The Prosecution Failed To Disclosed To The Defense Certain Critical Evidence — Additional Hairs — Although The Prosecution Knew That The Evidential Value Of The Hairs Taken From The Crime Scene Were Critical. This Amounts To A Brady Violation And Prosecutor Misconduct And The Remedy Is Vacating The Conviction And Dismissal Of The Charges. Finally, Trial Counsel Was Ineffective In Failing Earlier To See That Additional Hairs Remained Which Could Have Been Tested, And To Request Testing Of These Hairs? Must Petitioner’s Conviction Be Vacated And The Charges Dismissed Due To Insufficiency Of The Evidence. U.S. Const. Am Xiv? 1