(1) Is it structural error when sentencing errors were corrected by appeals court on direct appeal without defense counsel, and a constitutional denial of counsel on direct appeal when counsel withdrew and the petitioner was not informed by appeal counsel that he was withdrawing from the direct appeal, where the petitioner was oversentenced on the face of the record and has not been afforded any opportunity for review of this issue ?

(2) Would it be a U.S. First Amendment violation, due process violation and a miscarriage of justice if no court addressed the petitioner's Presentencing Investigation Report and Sentencing Guidelines Scoresheet prepared by probation, applied to the petitioner at sentencing to establish his minimum and maximum mandatory guideline sentence, that supports the fact that he was oversentenced and denied all redress ?

(3) Is it an unreasonable application of the U.S. Sixth Amendment, applied to the States by the U.S. Fourteenth Amendment, and U.S. Supreme Court precedent for courts to deny review of all Ineffective Assistance of Appeal Counsel claims of abondonment leading to the forfeiture of all meritous Ineffective Assistance of Trial Counsel claims by a pro se litigant to excuse all procedural bars ?

Whether sentencing errors were corrected by appeals court on direct appeal without defense counsel, and whether there was a constitutional denial of counsel on direct appeal